HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022/04/20 - 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
(REVISED PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS OPTION 4/20/2022 10:00AM)
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
April 20, 2022
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 (RCTV3).
In accordance with AB 361, and to ensure the health and safety of our residents by limiting
contact that could spread the COVID–19 virus, members of the public have the option to
participate in this City Council/Fire District meeting via a teleconference. Members of the public
may also attend the meeting in person. Those wishing to speak during public communication may
call at the start of the meeting by dialing (909)7742751, if speaking on a Public Hearing item,
please dial in when the Public Hearing is being heard at (909)7742751 to be added to the queue
for public comment. Calls will be answered in the order received. Members of the public are
encouraged to watch from the safety of their homes by Live Streaming on the City's website at
https://www.cityofrc.us/your government/citycouncilagendas or Local Cable: RCTV3
Programming. The City of Rancho Cucamonga thanks you in advance for taking all precautions to
prevent spreading the COVID19 virus.
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. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
D1.Training Provided by City Attorney on Behested Payment Disclosure Requirements and Reporting
Payments Made for a Charitable, Legislative or Government Purpose.
E. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSION
E1.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCES
DIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONS
WITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION (RCCEA)
AND TEAMSTERS LOCAL 1932. – (CITY)
E2.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4)
OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA V.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVSB2201969. (CITY)
E3.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4)
OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA V.
KULAR TRUCK LINE, INC., SBSC CASE NO.: CIVSB2201968. (CITY)
E4.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)
E5.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH
(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA V. DR LANDMARK, INC.; POWER MEDIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; HOFER
PROPERTIES, LLC; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUSIVE, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 1904713 –
(CITY)
E6.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR REAL PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS 8920 8TH STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA;
CITY NEGOTIATOR: JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER; NEGOTIATING PARTIES: JULIAN F.
TORKAN, MADISON CAPITAL GROUP, INC.; UNDER NEGOTIATION: PRICE AND TERMS OF
PAYMENT. – CITY
E7.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 AND
CERTAIN ADJACENT RIGHTOFWAY INCLUDED WITHIN THE STATION FOOTPRINT; CITY
NEGOTIATOR: JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA; NEGOTIATING PARTIES: SARAH WATERSON, PRESIDENT, REPRESENTING
DESERTXPRESS ENTERPRISES, LLC, DBA AS BRIGHTLINE WEST; UNDER NEGOTIATION:
PRICE AND TERMS OF PAYMENT. – (CITY)
F. 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 Proclamation Honoring CONFIRE Dispatchers and Declaring the Week of April 11
17, 2022 as National Dispatchers and Telecommunications Week.
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: March 16, 2022.
D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
$1,713,151.44 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $6,320,895.51 Dated March 28,
2022 Through April 10, 2022. (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 $31,881.86 Dated March 28, 2022
Through April 10, 2022. (CITY/FIRE)
D4.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of March 31, 2022 for the
City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)
D5.Consideration to Continue the Existing Local Emergency Due to the Novel Coronavirus
(COVID19) Pandemic. (CITY)
D6.Consideration to Schedule a Public Hearing for Placement of Liens for Delinquent Solid Waste
Accounts. (CITY)
D7.Consideration to Accept the Emergency Management Performance Grant Revenue in the
Amount of $28,018, Awarded by the California Office of Emergency Services and
Administered by the San Bernardino County Fire Department, Office of Emergency Services,
Fiscal Year 2021. (CITY/FIRE)
D8.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Mary McGrath Architects for
Conceptual Design Build Services for the Fire Station 171, Fire Station 173, and Fire Station
174 Projects in the Amount of $502,650, and Authorization of an Appropriation of $502,650.
(FIRE)
D9.Consideration to Accept as Complete, File a Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of
Retention for the RCFPD Fire Station No. 176 Site Improvements Project. (FIRE)
D10.Consideration to Approve Tract Map 19996, Located at 9353 Fairview Place, on the Southwest
Corner of Milliken Avenue and 6th Street, Related to Case No. ENG202100021. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Procure America for Cost Reduction
Consulting Services for the City’s Gas, Water, and Electric Utilities Accounts. (CITY)
D12.Consideration of a Contract with Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in an Amount of $371,000, Plus
10% Contingency for the Center Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)
D13.Consideration of (1) Resolution of Intent to Establish Street Lighting Services Community
Facilities District No. 202201; (2) Resolution of Intent to Annex Future Territory to Street
Lighting Services Community Facilities District No. 202201; (3) Resolution of Intent to
Establish Industrial Area Services Community Facilities District No. 202202; (4) Resolution of
Intent to Annex Future Territory to Industrial Area Services Community Facilities District No.
202202. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2022039, 2022040, 2022041 AND 2022042) (CITY)
D14.Consideration of Resolutions Authorizing Submittal of a Claim to the San Bernardino County
Transportation Authority (SBCTA) for Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Funds for
the Cucamonga Creek Channel Maintenance Project and Haven Avenue Sidewalk
Improvement Project. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2022037 AND 2022038) (CITY)
D15.Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Updating the Rancho Cucamonga Executive Management
Group Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 202122, Including a Salary Adjustment to the Planning
and Economic Development Director and Assistant City Manager Classifications, and updating
the Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 202122,
Including a Change in Exempt Status for the Library Assistant I Classification. (RESOLUTION
NO. 2022043) (CITY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Public Hearing for Consideration of an Appeal of the Planning Commission's Decision to Approve
Design Review DRC201900766 Ralph Karubian, Applicant. The Project is a Site Plan and
Architectural Review of a 159,580 SquareFoot Industrial/Warehouse Building on 7.39 Acres of Land
in the Industrial Employment (IE) District on the Northwest Corner of Jersey Boulevard and Milliken
Avenue; APN: 022911160. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Was Prepared For This Project.
(RESOLUTION NO. 2022035 AND RESOLUTION NO. 2022036) (CITY)
G2.Public Hearing for the Approval of the Draft 20222023 Action Plan for the Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) Program. (CITY)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
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
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 SeventyTwo (72) hours
prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California and on the
City's website
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(REVISED PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS OPTION 4/20/2022 10:00AM)CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDAApril 20, 202210500 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 (RCTV3).In accordance with AB 361, and to ensure the health and safety of our residents by limitingcontact that could spread the COVID–19 virus, members of the public have the option toparticipate in this City Council/Fire District meeting via a teleconference. Members of the publicmay also attend the meeting in person. Those wishing to speak during public communication maycall at the start of the meeting by dialing (909)7742751, if speaking on a Public Hearing item,please dial in when the Public Hearing is being heard at (909)7742751 to be added to the queuefor public comment. Calls will be answered in the order received. Members of the public areencouraged to watch from the safety of their homes by Live Streaming on the City's website athttps://www.cityofrc.us/your government/citycouncilagendas or Local Cable: RCTV3Programming. The City of Rancho Cucamonga thanks you in advance for taking all precautions toprevent spreading the COVID19 virus.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. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
D1.Training Provided by City Attorney on Behested Payment Disclosure Requirements and Reporting
Payments Made for a Charitable, Legislative or Government Purpose.
E. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSION
E1.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCES
DIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONS
WITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION (RCCEA)
AND TEAMSTERS LOCAL 1932. – (CITY)
E2.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4)
OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA V.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVSB2201969. (CITY)
E3.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4)
OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA V.
KULAR TRUCK LINE, INC., SBSC CASE NO.: CIVSB2201968. (CITY)
E4.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)
E5.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH
(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA V. DR LANDMARK, INC.; POWER MEDIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; HOFER
PROPERTIES, LLC; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUSIVE, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 1904713 –
(CITY)
E6.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR REAL PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS 8920 8TH STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA;
CITY NEGOTIATOR: JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER; NEGOTIATING PARTIES: JULIAN F.
TORKAN, MADISON CAPITAL GROUP, INC.; UNDER NEGOTIATION: PRICE AND TERMS OF
PAYMENT. – CITY
E7.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 AND
CERTAIN ADJACENT RIGHTOFWAY INCLUDED WITHIN THE STATION FOOTPRINT; CITY
NEGOTIATOR: JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA; NEGOTIATING PARTIES: SARAH WATERSON, PRESIDENT, REPRESENTING
DESERTXPRESS ENTERPRISES, LLC, DBA AS BRIGHTLINE WEST; UNDER NEGOTIATION:
PRICE AND TERMS OF PAYMENT. – (CITY)
F. 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 Proclamation Honoring CONFIRE Dispatchers and Declaring the Week of April 11
17, 2022 as National Dispatchers and Telecommunications Week.
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: March 16, 2022.
D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
$1,713,151.44 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $6,320,895.51 Dated March 28,
2022 Through April 10, 2022. (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 $31,881.86 Dated March 28, 2022
Through April 10, 2022. (CITY/FIRE)
D4.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of March 31, 2022 for the
City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)
D5.Consideration to Continue the Existing Local Emergency Due to the Novel Coronavirus
(COVID19) Pandemic. (CITY)
D6.Consideration to Schedule a Public Hearing for Placement of Liens for Delinquent Solid Waste
Accounts. (CITY)
D7.Consideration to Accept the Emergency Management Performance Grant Revenue in the
Amount of $28,018, Awarded by the California Office of Emergency Services and
Administered by the San Bernardino County Fire Department, Office of Emergency Services,
Fiscal Year 2021. (CITY/FIRE)
D8.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Mary McGrath Architects for
Conceptual Design Build Services for the Fire Station 171, Fire Station 173, and Fire Station
174 Projects in the Amount of $502,650, and Authorization of an Appropriation of $502,650.
(FIRE)
D9.Consideration to Accept as Complete, File a Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of
Retention for the RCFPD Fire Station No. 176 Site Improvements Project. (FIRE)
D10.Consideration to Approve Tract Map 19996, Located at 9353 Fairview Place, on the Southwest
Corner of Milliken Avenue and 6th Street, Related to Case No. ENG202100021. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Procure America for Cost Reduction
Consulting Services for the City’s Gas, Water, and Electric Utilities Accounts. (CITY)
D12.Consideration of a Contract with Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in an Amount of $371,000, Plus
10% Contingency for the Center Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)
D13.Consideration of (1) Resolution of Intent to Establish Street Lighting Services Community
Facilities District No. 202201; (2) Resolution of Intent to Annex Future Territory to Street
Lighting Services Community Facilities District No. 202201; (3) Resolution of Intent to
Establish Industrial Area Services Community Facilities District No. 202202; (4) Resolution of
Intent to Annex Future Territory to Industrial Area Services Community Facilities District No.
202202. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2022039, 2022040, 2022041 AND 2022042) (CITY)
D14.Consideration of Resolutions Authorizing Submittal of a Claim to the San Bernardino County
Transportation Authority (SBCTA) for Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Funds for
the Cucamonga Creek Channel Maintenance Project and Haven Avenue Sidewalk
Improvement Project. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2022037 AND 2022038) (CITY)
D15.Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Updating the Rancho Cucamonga Executive Management
Group Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 202122, Including a Salary Adjustment to the Planning
and Economic Development Director and Assistant City Manager Classifications, and updating
the Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 202122,
Including a Change in Exempt Status for the Library Assistant I Classification. (RESOLUTION
NO. 2022043) (CITY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Public Hearing for Consideration of an Appeal of the Planning Commission's Decision to Approve
Design Review DRC201900766 Ralph Karubian, Applicant. The Project is a Site Plan and
Architectural Review of a 159,580 SquareFoot Industrial/Warehouse Building on 7.39 Acres of Land
in the Industrial Employment (IE) District on the Northwest Corner of Jersey Boulevard and Milliken
Avenue; APN: 022911160. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Was Prepared For This Project.
(RESOLUTION NO. 2022035 AND RESOLUTION NO. 2022036) (CITY)
G2.Public Hearing for the Approval of the Draft 20222023 Action Plan for the Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) Program. (CITY)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
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
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 SeventyTwo (72) hours
prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California and on the
City's website
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(REVISED PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS OPTION 4/20/2022 10:00AM)CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDAApril 20, 202210500 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 (RCTV3).In accordance with AB 361, and to ensure the health and safety of our residents by limitingcontact that could spread the COVID–19 virus, members of the public have the option toparticipate in this City Council/Fire District meeting via a teleconference. Members of the publicmay also attend the meeting in person. Those wishing to speak during public communication maycall at the start of the meeting by dialing (909)7742751, if speaking on a Public Hearing item,please dial in when the Public Hearing is being heard at (909)7742751 to be added to the queuefor public comment. Calls will be answered in the order received. Members of the public areencouraged to watch from the safety of their homes by Live Streaming on the City's website athttps://www.cityofrc.us/your government/citycouncilagendas or Local Cable: RCTV3Programming. The City of Rancho Cucamonga thanks you in advance for taking all precautions toprevent spreading the COVID19 virus.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. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMSD1.Training Provided by City Attorney on Behested Payment Disclosure Requirements and ReportingPayments Made for a Charitable, Legislative or Government Purpose.E. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSIONE1.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCESDIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONSWITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION (RCCEA)AND TEAMSTERS LOCAL 1932. – (CITY)E2.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4)OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA V.SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVSB2201969. (CITY)E3.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4)OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA V.KULAR TRUCK LINE, INC., SBSC CASE NO.: CIVSB2201968. (CITY)E4.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9333 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916223; 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. NEGOTIATINGPARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. – (CITY)E5.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA V. DR LANDMARK, INC.; POWER MEDIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; HOFERPROPERTIES, LLC; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUSIVE, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 1904713 –(CITY)E6.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR REAL PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS 8920 8TH STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA;CITY NEGOTIATOR: JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER; NEGOTIATING PARTIES: JULIAN F.TORKAN, MADISON CAPITAL GROUP, INC.; UNDER NEGOTIATION: PRICE AND TERMS OFPAYMENT. – CITYE7.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA METROLINK STATION IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL NUMBERS 020927211, 020914321, AND 020927222 ANDCERTAIN ADJACENT RIGHTOFWAY INCLUDED WITHIN THE STATION FOOTPRINT; CITYNEGOTIATOR: JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA; NEGOTIATING PARTIES: SARAH WATERSON, PRESIDENT, REPRESENTINGDESERTXPRESS ENTERPRISES, LLC, DBA AS BRIGHTLINE WEST; UNDER NEGOTIATION:PRICE AND TERMS OF PAYMENT. – (CITY)F. 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 Proclamation Honoring CONFIRE Dispatchers and Declaring the Week of April 11
17, 2022 as National Dispatchers and Telecommunications Week.
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: March 16, 2022.
D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
$1,713,151.44 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $6,320,895.51 Dated March 28,
2022 Through April 10, 2022. (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 $31,881.86 Dated March 28, 2022
Through April 10, 2022. (CITY/FIRE)
D4.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of March 31, 2022 for the
City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)
D5.Consideration to Continue the Existing Local Emergency Due to the Novel Coronavirus
(COVID19) Pandemic. (CITY)
D6.Consideration to Schedule a Public Hearing for Placement of Liens for Delinquent Solid Waste
Accounts. (CITY)
D7.Consideration to Accept the Emergency Management Performance Grant Revenue in the
Amount of $28,018, Awarded by the California Office of Emergency Services and
Administered by the San Bernardino County Fire Department, Office of Emergency Services,
Fiscal Year 2021. (CITY/FIRE)
D8.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Mary McGrath Architects for
Conceptual Design Build Services for the Fire Station 171, Fire Station 173, and Fire Station
174 Projects in the Amount of $502,650, and Authorization of an Appropriation of $502,650.
(FIRE)
D9.Consideration to Accept as Complete, File a Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of
Retention for the RCFPD Fire Station No. 176 Site Improvements Project. (FIRE)
D10.Consideration to Approve Tract Map 19996, Located at 9353 Fairview Place, on the Southwest
Corner of Milliken Avenue and 6th Street, Related to Case No. ENG202100021. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Procure America for Cost Reduction
Consulting Services for the City’s Gas, Water, and Electric Utilities Accounts. (CITY)
D12.Consideration of a Contract with Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in an Amount of $371,000, Plus
10% Contingency for the Center Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)
D13.Consideration of (1) Resolution of Intent to Establish Street Lighting Services Community
Facilities District No. 202201; (2) Resolution of Intent to Annex Future Territory to Street
Lighting Services Community Facilities District No. 202201; (3) Resolution of Intent to
Establish Industrial Area Services Community Facilities District No. 202202; (4) Resolution of
Intent to Annex Future Territory to Industrial Area Services Community Facilities District No.
202202. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2022039, 2022040, 2022041 AND 2022042) (CITY)
D14.Consideration of Resolutions Authorizing Submittal of a Claim to the San Bernardino County
Transportation Authority (SBCTA) for Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Funds for
the Cucamonga Creek Channel Maintenance Project and Haven Avenue Sidewalk
Improvement Project. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2022037 AND 2022038) (CITY)
D15.Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Updating the Rancho Cucamonga Executive Management
Group Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 202122, Including a Salary Adjustment to the Planning
and Economic Development Director and Assistant City Manager Classifications, and updating
the Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 202122,
Including a Change in Exempt Status for the Library Assistant I Classification. (RESOLUTION
NO. 2022043) (CITY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Public Hearing for Consideration of an Appeal of the Planning Commission's Decision to Approve
Design Review DRC201900766 Ralph Karubian, Applicant. The Project is a Site Plan and
Architectural Review of a 159,580 SquareFoot Industrial/Warehouse Building on 7.39 Acres of Land
in the Industrial Employment (IE) District on the Northwest Corner of Jersey Boulevard and Milliken
Avenue; APN: 022911160. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Was Prepared For This Project.
(RESOLUTION NO. 2022035 AND RESOLUTION NO. 2022036) (CITY)
G2.Public Hearing for the Approval of the Draft 20222023 Action Plan for the Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) Program. (CITY)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
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
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 SeventyTwo (72) hours
prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California and on the
City's website
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(REVISED PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS OPTION 4/20/2022 10:00AM)CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDAApril 20, 202210500 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 (RCTV3).In accordance with AB 361, and to ensure the health and safety of our residents by limitingcontact that could spread the COVID–19 virus, members of the public have the option toparticipate in this City Council/Fire District meeting via a teleconference. Members of the publicmay also attend the meeting in person. Those wishing to speak during public communication maycall at the start of the meeting by dialing (909)7742751, if speaking on a Public Hearing item,please dial in when the Public Hearing is being heard at (909)7742751 to be added to the queuefor public comment. Calls will be answered in the order received. Members of the public areencouraged to watch from the safety of their homes by Live Streaming on the City's website athttps://www.cityofrc.us/your government/citycouncilagendas or Local Cable: RCTV3Programming. The City of Rancho Cucamonga thanks you in advance for taking all precautions toprevent spreading the COVID19 virus.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. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMSD1.Training Provided by City Attorney on Behested Payment Disclosure Requirements and ReportingPayments Made for a Charitable, Legislative or Government Purpose.E. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSIONE1.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCESDIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONSWITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION (RCCEA)AND TEAMSTERS LOCAL 1932. – (CITY)E2.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4)OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA V.SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVSB2201969. (CITY)E3.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4)OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA V.KULAR TRUCK LINE, INC., SBSC CASE NO.: CIVSB2201968. (CITY)E4.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9333 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916223; 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. NEGOTIATINGPARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. – (CITY)E5.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA V. DR LANDMARK, INC.; POWER MEDIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; HOFERPROPERTIES, LLC; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUSIVE, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 1904713 –(CITY)E6.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR REAL PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS 8920 8TH STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA;CITY NEGOTIATOR: JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER; NEGOTIATING PARTIES: JULIAN F.TORKAN, MADISON CAPITAL GROUP, INC.; UNDER NEGOTIATION: PRICE AND TERMS OFPAYMENT. – CITYE7.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA METROLINK STATION IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL NUMBERS 020927211, 020914321, AND 020927222 ANDCERTAIN ADJACENT RIGHTOFWAY INCLUDED WITHIN THE STATION FOOTPRINT; CITYNEGOTIATOR: JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA; NEGOTIATING PARTIES: SARAH WATERSON, PRESIDENT, REPRESENTINGDESERTXPRESS ENTERPRISES, LLC, DBA AS BRIGHTLINE WEST; UNDER NEGOTIATION:PRICE AND TERMS OF PAYMENT. – (CITY)F. 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 Proclamation Honoring CONFIRE Dispatchers and Declaring the Week of April 1117, 2022 as National Dispatchers and Telecommunications Week.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 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: March 16, 2022.
D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
$1,713,151.44 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $6,320,895.51 Dated March 28,
2022 Through April 10, 2022. (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 $31,881.86 Dated March 28, 2022
Through April 10, 2022. (CITY/FIRE)
D4.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of March 31, 2022 for the
City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)
D5.Consideration to Continue the Existing Local Emergency Due to the Novel Coronavirus
(COVID19) Pandemic. (CITY)
D6.Consideration to Schedule a Public Hearing for Placement of Liens for Delinquent Solid Waste
Accounts. (CITY)
D7.Consideration to Accept the Emergency Management Performance Grant Revenue in the
Amount of $28,018, Awarded by the California Office of Emergency Services and
Administered by the San Bernardino County Fire Department, Office of Emergency Services,
Fiscal Year 2021. (CITY/FIRE)
D8.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Mary McGrath Architects for
Conceptual Design Build Services for the Fire Station 171, Fire Station 173, and Fire Station
174 Projects in the Amount of $502,650, and Authorization of an Appropriation of $502,650.
(FIRE)
D9.Consideration to Accept as Complete, File a Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of
Retention for the RCFPD Fire Station No. 176 Site Improvements Project. (FIRE)
D10.Consideration to Approve Tract Map 19996, Located at 9353 Fairview Place, on the Southwest
Corner of Milliken Avenue and 6th Street, Related to Case No. ENG202100021. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Procure America for Cost Reduction
Consulting Services for the City’s Gas, Water, and Electric Utilities Accounts. (CITY)
D12.Consideration of a Contract with Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in an Amount of $371,000, Plus
10% Contingency for the Center Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)
D13.Consideration of (1) Resolution of Intent to Establish Street Lighting Services Community
Facilities District No. 202201; (2) Resolution of Intent to Annex Future Territory to Street
Lighting Services Community Facilities District No. 202201; (3) Resolution of Intent to
Establish Industrial Area Services Community Facilities District No. 202202; (4) Resolution of
Intent to Annex Future Territory to Industrial Area Services Community Facilities District No.
202202. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2022039, 2022040, 2022041 AND 2022042) (CITY)
D14.Consideration of Resolutions Authorizing Submittal of a Claim to the San Bernardino County
Transportation Authority (SBCTA) for Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Funds for
the Cucamonga Creek Channel Maintenance Project and Haven Avenue Sidewalk
Improvement Project. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2022037 AND 2022038) (CITY)
D15.Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Updating the Rancho Cucamonga Executive Management
Group Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 202122, Including a Salary Adjustment to the Planning
and Economic Development Director and Assistant City Manager Classifications, and updating
the Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 202122,
Including a Change in Exempt Status for the Library Assistant I Classification. (RESOLUTION
NO. 2022043) (CITY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Public Hearing for Consideration of an Appeal of the Planning Commission's Decision to Approve
Design Review DRC201900766 Ralph Karubian, Applicant. The Project is a Site Plan and
Architectural Review of a 159,580 SquareFoot Industrial/Warehouse Building on 7.39 Acres of Land
in the Industrial Employment (IE) District on the Northwest Corner of Jersey Boulevard and Milliken
Avenue; APN: 022911160. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Was Prepared For This Project.
(RESOLUTION NO. 2022035 AND RESOLUTION NO. 2022036) (CITY)
G2.Public Hearing for the Approval of the Draft 20222023 Action Plan for the Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) Program. (CITY)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
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
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 SeventyTwo (72) hours
prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California and on the
City's website
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(REVISED PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS OPTION 4/20/2022 10:00AM)CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDAApril 20, 202210500 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 (RCTV3).In accordance with AB 361, and to ensure the health and safety of our residents by limitingcontact that could spread the COVID–19 virus, members of the public have the option toparticipate in this City Council/Fire District meeting via a teleconference. Members of the publicmay also attend the meeting in person. Those wishing to speak during public communication maycall at the start of the meeting by dialing (909)7742751, if speaking on a Public Hearing item,please dial in when the Public Hearing is being heard at (909)7742751 to be added to the queuefor public comment. Calls will be answered in the order received. Members of the public areencouraged to watch from the safety of their homes by Live Streaming on the City's website athttps://www.cityofrc.us/your government/citycouncilagendas or Local Cable: RCTV3Programming. The City of Rancho Cucamonga thanks you in advance for taking all precautions toprevent spreading the COVID19 virus.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. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMSD1.Training Provided by City Attorney on Behested Payment Disclosure Requirements and ReportingPayments Made for a Charitable, Legislative or Government Purpose.E. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSIONE1.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCESDIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONSWITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION (RCCEA)AND TEAMSTERS LOCAL 1932. – (CITY)E2.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4)OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA V.SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVSB2201969. (CITY)E3.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4)OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA V.KULAR TRUCK LINE, INC., SBSC CASE NO.: CIVSB2201968. (CITY)E4.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9333 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916223; 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. NEGOTIATINGPARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. – (CITY)E5.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA V. DR LANDMARK, INC.; POWER MEDIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; HOFERPROPERTIES, LLC; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUSIVE, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 1904713 –(CITY)E6.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR REAL PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS 8920 8TH STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA;CITY NEGOTIATOR: JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER; NEGOTIATING PARTIES: JULIAN F.TORKAN, MADISON CAPITAL GROUP, INC.; UNDER NEGOTIATION: PRICE AND TERMS OFPAYMENT. – CITYE7.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA METROLINK STATION IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL NUMBERS 020927211, 020914321, AND 020927222 ANDCERTAIN ADJACENT RIGHTOFWAY INCLUDED WITHIN THE STATION FOOTPRINT; CITYNEGOTIATOR: JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA; NEGOTIATING PARTIES: SARAH WATERSON, PRESIDENT, REPRESENTINGDESERTXPRESS ENTERPRISES, LLC, DBA AS BRIGHTLINE WEST; UNDER NEGOTIATION:PRICE AND TERMS OF PAYMENT. – (CITY)F. 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 Proclamation Honoring CONFIRE Dispatchers and Declaring the Week of April 1117, 2022 as National Dispatchers and Telecommunications Week.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: March 16, 2022.D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of$1,713,151.44 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued toSouthern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $6,320,895.51 Dated March 28,2022 Through April 10, 2022. (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 $31,881.86 Dated March 28, 2022Through April 10, 2022. (CITY/FIRE)D4.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of March 31, 2022 for theCity of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)D5.Consideration to Continue the Existing Local Emergency Due to the Novel Coronavirus(COVID19) Pandemic. (CITY)D6.Consideration to Schedule a Public Hearing for Placement of Liens for Delinquent Solid WasteAccounts. (CITY)D7.Consideration to Accept the Emergency Management Performance Grant Revenue in theAmount of $28,018, Awarded by the California Office of Emergency Services andAdministered by the San Bernardino County Fire Department, Office of Emergency Services,Fiscal Year 2021. (CITY/FIRE)D8.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Mary McGrath Architects forConceptual Design Build Services for the Fire Station 171, Fire Station 173, and Fire Station174 Projects in the Amount of $502,650, and Authorization of an Appropriation of $502,650.(FIRE)D9.Consideration to Accept as Complete, File a Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release ofRetention for the RCFPD Fire Station No. 176 Site Improvements Project. (FIRE)D10.Consideration to Approve Tract Map 19996, Located at 9353 Fairview Place, on the Southwest
Corner of Milliken Avenue and 6th Street, Related to Case No. ENG202100021. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Procure America for Cost Reduction
Consulting Services for the City’s Gas, Water, and Electric Utilities Accounts. (CITY)
D12.Consideration of a Contract with Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in an Amount of $371,000, Plus
10% Contingency for the Center Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)
D13.Consideration of (1) Resolution of Intent to Establish Street Lighting Services Community
Facilities District No. 202201; (2) Resolution of Intent to Annex Future Territory to Street
Lighting Services Community Facilities District No. 202201; (3) Resolution of Intent to
Establish Industrial Area Services Community Facilities District No. 202202; (4) Resolution of
Intent to Annex Future Territory to Industrial Area Services Community Facilities District No.
202202. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2022039, 2022040, 2022041 AND 2022042) (CITY)
D14.Consideration of Resolutions Authorizing Submittal of a Claim to the San Bernardino County
Transportation Authority (SBCTA) for Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Funds for
the Cucamonga Creek Channel Maintenance Project and Haven Avenue Sidewalk
Improvement Project. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2022037 AND 2022038) (CITY)
D15.Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Updating the Rancho Cucamonga Executive Management
Group Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 202122, Including a Salary Adjustment to the Planning
and Economic Development Director and Assistant City Manager Classifications, and updating
the Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 202122,
Including a Change in Exempt Status for the Library Assistant I Classification. (RESOLUTION
NO. 2022043) (CITY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Public Hearing for Consideration of an Appeal of the Planning Commission's Decision to Approve
Design Review DRC201900766 Ralph Karubian, Applicant. The Project is a Site Plan and
Architectural Review of a 159,580 SquareFoot Industrial/Warehouse Building on 7.39 Acres of Land
in the Industrial Employment (IE) District on the Northwest Corner of Jersey Boulevard and Milliken
Avenue; APN: 022911160. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Was Prepared For This Project.
(RESOLUTION NO. 2022035 AND RESOLUTION NO. 2022036) (CITY)
G2.Public Hearing for the Approval of the Draft 20222023 Action Plan for the Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) Program. (CITY)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
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
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 SeventyTwo (72) hours
prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California and on the
City's website
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(REVISED PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS OPTION 4/20/2022 10:00AM)CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDAApril 20, 202210500 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 (RCTV3).In accordance with AB 361, and to ensure the health and safety of our residents by limitingcontact that could spread the COVID–19 virus, members of the public have the option toparticipate in this City Council/Fire District meeting via a teleconference. Members of the publicmay also attend the meeting in person. Those wishing to speak during public communication maycall at the start of the meeting by dialing (909)7742751, if speaking on a Public Hearing item,please dial in when the Public Hearing is being heard at (909)7742751 to be added to the queuefor public comment. Calls will be answered in the order received. Members of the public areencouraged to watch from the safety of their homes by Live Streaming on the City's website athttps://www.cityofrc.us/your government/citycouncilagendas or Local Cable: RCTV3Programming. The City of Rancho Cucamonga thanks you in advance for taking all precautions toprevent spreading the COVID19 virus.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. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMSD1.Training Provided by City Attorney on Behested Payment Disclosure Requirements and ReportingPayments Made for a Charitable, Legislative or Government Purpose.E. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSIONE1.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCESDIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONSWITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION (RCCEA)AND TEAMSTERS LOCAL 1932. – (CITY)E2.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4)OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA V.SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVSB2201969. (CITY)E3.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4)OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA V.KULAR TRUCK LINE, INC., SBSC CASE NO.: CIVSB2201968. (CITY)E4.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9333 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916223; 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. NEGOTIATINGPARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH ABOVE. – (CITY)E5.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA V. DR LANDMARK, INC.; POWER MEDIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; HOFERPROPERTIES, LLC; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUSIVE, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 1904713 –(CITY)E6.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR REAL PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS 8920 8TH STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA;CITY NEGOTIATOR: JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER; NEGOTIATING PARTIES: JULIAN F.TORKAN, MADISON CAPITAL GROUP, INC.; UNDER NEGOTIATION: PRICE AND TERMS OFPAYMENT. – CITYE7.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA METROLINK STATION IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL NUMBERS 020927211, 020914321, AND 020927222 ANDCERTAIN ADJACENT RIGHTOFWAY INCLUDED WITHIN THE STATION FOOTPRINT; CITYNEGOTIATOR: JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA; NEGOTIATING PARTIES: SARAH WATERSON, PRESIDENT, REPRESENTINGDESERTXPRESS ENTERPRISES, LLC, DBA AS BRIGHTLINE WEST; UNDER NEGOTIATION:PRICE AND TERMS OF PAYMENT. – (CITY)F. 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 Proclamation Honoring CONFIRE Dispatchers and Declaring the Week of April 1117, 2022 as National Dispatchers and Telecommunications Week.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: March 16, 2022.D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of$1,713,151.44 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued toSouthern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $6,320,895.51 Dated March 28,2022 Through April 10, 2022. (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 $31,881.86 Dated March 28, 2022Through April 10, 2022. (CITY/FIRE)D4.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of March 31, 2022 for theCity of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)D5.Consideration to Continue the Existing Local Emergency Due to the Novel Coronavirus(COVID19) Pandemic. (CITY)D6.Consideration to Schedule a Public Hearing for Placement of Liens for Delinquent Solid WasteAccounts. (CITY)D7.Consideration to Accept the Emergency Management Performance Grant Revenue in theAmount of $28,018, Awarded by the California Office of Emergency Services andAdministered by the San Bernardino County Fire Department, Office of Emergency Services,Fiscal Year 2021. (CITY/FIRE)D8.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Mary McGrath Architects forConceptual Design Build Services for the Fire Station 171, Fire Station 173, and Fire Station174 Projects in the Amount of $502,650, and Authorization of an Appropriation of $502,650.(FIRE)D9.Consideration to Accept as Complete, File a Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release ofRetention for the RCFPD Fire Station No. 176 Site Improvements Project. (FIRE)D10.Consideration to Approve Tract Map 19996, Located at 9353 Fairview Place, on the SouthwestCorner of Milliken Avenue and 6th Street, Related to Case No. ENG202100021. (CITY)D11.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Procure America for Cost ReductionConsulting Services for the City’s Gas, Water, and Electric Utilities Accounts. (CITY)D12.Consideration of a Contract with Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in an Amount of $371,000, Plus10% Contingency for the Center Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)D13.Consideration of (1) Resolution of Intent to Establish Street Lighting Services CommunityFacilities District No. 202201; (2) Resolution of Intent to Annex Future Territory to StreetLighting Services Community Facilities District No. 202201; (3) Resolution of Intent toEstablish Industrial Area Services Community Facilities District No. 202202; (4) Resolution ofIntent to Annex Future Territory to Industrial Area Services Community Facilities District No.202202. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2022039, 2022040, 2022041 AND 2022042) (CITY)D14.Consideration of Resolutions Authorizing Submittal of a Claim to the San Bernardino CountyTransportation Authority (SBCTA) for Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Funds forthe Cucamonga Creek Channel Maintenance Project and Haven Avenue SidewalkImprovement Project. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2022037 AND 2022038) (CITY)D15.Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Updating the Rancho Cucamonga Executive ManagementGroup Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 202122, Including a Salary Adjustment to the Planningand Economic Development Director and Assistant City Manager Classifications, and updatingthe Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 202122,Including a Change in Exempt Status for the Library Assistant I Classification. (RESOLUTIONNO. 2022043) (CITY)E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTIONF. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICTG1.Public Hearing for Consideration of an Appeal of the Planning Commission's Decision to ApproveDesign Review DRC201900766 Ralph Karubian, Applicant. The Project is a Site Plan andArchitectural Review of a 159,580 SquareFoot Industrial/Warehouse Building on 7.39 Acres of Landin the Industrial Employment (IE) District on the Northwest Corner of Jersey Boulevard and MillikenAvenue; APN: 022911160. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Was Prepared For This Project.(RESOLUTION NO. 2022035 AND RESOLUTION NO. 2022036) (CITY)G2.Public Hearing for the Approval of the Draft 20222023 Action Plan for the Community DevelopmentBlock Grant (CDBG) Program. (CITY)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
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
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 SeventyTwo (72) hours
prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California and on the
City's website
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
Understanding the Political Reform Act’s Behested Payment Rule and New FPPC Reporting Requirements
April 20, 2022
Nicholas R. Ghirelli, City Attorney
General Rule
Certain payments made at the behest of an elected official to charitable, legislative, or governmental causes must be reported within 30 days after the payments equal or exceed $5,000 in the aggregate from the same source in the same calendar year.
A reporting requirement; not a recusal requirement
Behested payments are not “gifts” to the official, and subject to different rules.
But, conditioning official action on a contribution of any kind is a bribe. Don’t accept bribes. Ever.
•Bad Example: “If you donate $500 to my favorite charity, I will agree to support your zone change application.”
•Good Example: “The Fire District is developing a moving 9/11 Memorial and any contribution you make would help.”
Who Does the Rule Apply to?
Elected officials (City Council, Treasurer, City
Clerk)
Does not apply to:
•City staff
•Appointed officials (e.g., City commissioners)
•The City as an entity, provided elected officials are not
named, and do not sign, the donation request.
“At the Behest of an Elected Official”
Request, suggestion, or solicitation of the City
official
•Example: You call or send a letter to a resident requesting
a donation to the Library Foundation
Cooperation, consultation, coordination or
concert with the City official
•Example: You ask someone to call or send a letter to a
resident requesting a donation to the Library Foundation
Behested Payments: To Whom?
Payments made for a legislative, governmental, or
charitable cause “at the behest of” an elected
official or committee. Gov. Code §82004.5
•“Legislative causes” would include lobbying efforts or
drafting legislation
•“Government causes” include City events, programs, and
projects.
•Typically a 501(c)(3) is considered a “charitable cause.”
Example of Behested Payments
A councilmember asks a business to make a
contribution to the City or to a nonprofit
organization and that business makes the
contribution, the contribution is made at the
“behest” of the councilmember and is thus a
behested contribution.
Examples of Behested Payments
The Mayor sends a letter to businesses in the City.
The letter is on city letterhead and asks the
business to contribute to an event or program for
the City. If any one of those entities comes
forward with a contribution to the City that equals
or exceeds $5,000, then the Mayor would need to
fill out a behested contribution reporting form.
The same would apply to any of the
councilmembers who sign the letter or request
that the Mayor send the letter.
Reporting Requirement: Amount
Elected officials must report a behested payment
of $5,000 or more from a single source during a
calendar year. Gov. Code §84224 (a).
Does not apply if the councilmember is successful
in getting a group of businesses or individuals to
cumulatively contribute more than $5,000 to a
charity in a calendar year, as long as no one
business or person makes a $5,000 or greater
contribution.
What If I Don’t Know the Amount?
File a report based on a good faith estimate.
But, first make a reasonable effort to obtain the
information from the recipient:
•Send a written request to the recipient at least 30 days
before the reporting deadline (see Form 803 for sample
language).
•Form 803 must state that the payment information is an
estimate that reflects your best efforts to obtain accurate
information.
•File an amended report within 10 days of receiving the
required information from the recipient.
Reporting Requirements: Required Information
Must report to the City Clerk on a Form 803 within 30 days of reaching the $5,000 threshold.
Form 803 requires:
•The contributor’s name and address;
•The amount of the contribution;
•The date or dates on which the payments were made;
•The name and address of the contribution recipient;
•If goods or services were contributed, a description of those
goods and services; and
•A description of the purpose or event for which the
contribution was used.
Form 803
New Reporting Requirements on Form 803: Nonprofit Organization
Brief description of any relationship of the nonprofit organization payee to the elected officer or a member of their immediate family, or member of their campaign or office staff. The brief description must include the following information about those persons:
(1) Any decision-making capacity within the organization, such as a board member or executive officer position.
(2) Salaried employment at the organization.
(3) Status as a founding member of the organization.
(4) A position on an honorary or advisory board of the organization.
New Reporting Requirements on Form 803: Business Before City
Provide brief description of any proceeding before the City at the time of a reported payment or within the 12 months prior to the reported payment in which the payor is the named party or subject of the decision.
•“Proceeding” includes decisions on a contract, license, permit, or other entitlement and matters specific to an entity or person. Does not include decisions on general legislation.
•“Before the elected officer's agency” means it has been placed on a formal agenda, or if the official has knowledge that the matter has been submitted to the City for decision and the official may make, participate in making, or otherwise use official position to influence the City's decision on the matter.
New Reporting Requirement on Form 803: Donor Advised Fund
Special tax treatment for certain kinds of charitable entities.
A donor advised fund is a separate fund maintained and operated by a section 501(c)(3) organization called a “sponsoring organization.” Fund accounts are composed of contributions made by individual donors.
FPPC now requires disclosure of sponsoring organization, donor advised fund, and individual donor.
Special rules for anonymous donations.
Questions?
Thank you!
Nicholas R. Ghirellinghirelli@rwglaw.com
March 16, 2022
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, March 16, 2022, in the Tri-
Communities Conference Room at City Hall, 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; Nicholas Ghirelli, 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 LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCES
DIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6 REGARDING LABOR
NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION
(RCCEA), TEAMSTERS LOCAL 1932, EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT GROUP – (CITY)
D2. 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)
D3. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE TERMINUS OF SMOKESTONE
STREET, EAST OF TORREY PINE COURT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91739,
IDENTIFIED AS COUNTY ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER 022804424, NEGOTIATING
PARTIES JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, AND CHAO PING YANG; REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. – (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
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)
Page 7
*DRAFT*
March 16, 2022 | 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
D5. 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)
D6. 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)
D7. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8768 AND 8822 ETIWANDA
AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NUMBER 022913115, 16, AND 26; 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)
D8. 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)
D9. 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 022916215; 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 ONETHIRD (1/3)
INTEREST, AND JAMES ROY GARNESS AND RHONDA ANN GARNESS, UNDIVIDED
ONETHIRD (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 ONETHIRD (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 ONETHIRD (1/3) INTEREST, AS TENANTS
Page 8
*DRAFT*
March 16, 2022 | 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
IN COMMON, 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 12521 ARROW ROUTE AND 8688
ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022913130 AND 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)
D11. 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 and 18; 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)
D12. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8685 TO 8821 ETIWANDA AVENUE
AND 12928 TO 12974 WHITTRAM AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS SAN
BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022915115 AND 28,
022916101, 02, 03, 04, 05, 19, AND 20; 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)
D13. 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)
D14. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO
PARAGRAPH (4) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA V. TOWER OF POWER CORPORATION, SBSC CASE NO.:
PENDING. (CITY)
Page 9
*DRAFT*
March 16, 2022 | 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
D15. 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)
E. RECESS The closed session recessed at 6:55 p.m.
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
March 16, 2022 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; Nicholas Ghirelli, City Attorney and Linda Troyan, MMC, City
Clerk Services Director.
Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy led the Pledge of Allegiance.
A. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA
Linda Troyan, City Clerk Services Director, announced for the record that Council received at the dais a revised
Exhibit on item D8, with an added column for clarification.
B. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
B1. Presentation of a Certificate of Sympathy in Memory of Sartaj Singh, Longtime Community Member.
Mayor Michael and Members of the City Council presented a Certificate of Sympathy to the Singh family and
announced that at the conclusion of the meeting the City Council will have a moment of silence and adjourn
the meeting in memory of Sartaj Singh, longtime community member.
B2. Recognition of Healthy RC Community Partners for Outstanding Service for the C.A.S.A. Cooking
Program.
Mayor Michael and Members of the City Council along with Joanna Marrufo, Community Programs Coordinator
and the Alanis family recognized Healthy RC Community Partners Mike Chaix, Cucamonga School District
Superintendent, Jenna Garretson-Tramayne, Principal of Cucamonga Elementary, Amber Arreguin, Principal
of Los Amigos Elementary and Adriana Castellanos, Blessed Farms for the outstanding service to the C.A.S.A.
Cooking Program.
C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Janet Walton, read a St. Patrick’s Day story and offered a prayer.
Frank Atry, spoke on public communications made in the past regarding parking signs and spoke on parking
citations.
Page 10
*DRAFT*
March 16, 2022 | 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
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
Council Member Scott announced that she will need to abstain on item D3, due to a potential conflict of
interest as her employer is Southern California Gas Company.
D1. Consideration of Meeting Minutes for the Regular Meetings of: January 19, 2022, February 2,2022,
February 16,2022 and March 2, 2022.
D2. Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Bi-Weekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
$1,713,220.57 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $2,666,741.48 Dated February 22, 2022,
Through March 06, 2022, and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for the Month of
February in the Total Amount of $2,370,806.79. (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 $25,807.70 Dated February 22, 2022,
Through March 6, 2022. (CITY/FIRE)
D4. Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedule as of February 28, 2022 for theCity of
Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)
D5. Consideration to Receive and File the Housing Element Annual Progress Report for 2021. (CITY)
D6. Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Approving a Side Letter of Agreement Between the City of
Rancho Cucamonga and the Executive Management Employee Group. (RESOLUTION NO.
2022-034) (CITY)
D7. Consideration of an Agreement with NBS Government Finance Group for D-FAST 3 SoftwareLicense
Agreement. (CITY)
D8. Consideration to Award a Contract to Gentry Brothers, Inc. for the "CDBG Concrete
Rehabilitation Project". (CITY)
D9. Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Located at the Northeast Corner of Foothill Boulevard
and Klusman Avenue per the Improvement Agreement Related to Case No. DRC2008-00356, as
Complete, File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY)
D10. Consideration of Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with CambridgeSeven
Associates (Contract No. 2020-120) for Design Services Not to Exceed $162,000. (CITY)
D11. Consideration of an Easement Agreement Between Cucamonga Valley Water District and TheCity of
Rancho Cucamonga for the Purposes of Constructing a Retaining Wall Within City Right-of-Way at the
Northwest Corner of 19th Street and Sapphire Street. (CITY)
D12. Consideration of the 2021 Annual Review of the Development Agreement by and between SCRancho
Development Corp., a California Corporation and Empire Lakes Holding Company, LLC, a
Delaware Limited Liability Company and the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Case No.
DRC2015-00118. (CITY)
D13. Consideration of a Purchase and Sale Agreement with the Jones Family Trust, the Garness Family
Trust, & the Clemons Revocable Trust for the Acquisition of a Temporary Construction Easement
Page 11
*DRAFT*
March 16, 2022 | 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
Located at 8821 Etiwanda Avenue (Assessor Parcel Number 0229-162-15) in Connection with the
Etiwanda Grade Separation Project. (CITY)
D14. Consideration of a Purchase and Sale Agreement with the Colombero Family Limited Partnership
for the Acquisition of a Permanent Roadway Easement, a Non -Exclusive Maintenance and
Construction Easement, and Temporary Construction Easements Located at8685 to 8733 Etiwanda
Avenue and 12928 to 12974 Whittram Avenue (Assessor Parcel
Numbers 0229-151-15 and 28, and 0229-161-01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 19, and 20) in Connection with the
Etiwanda Grade Separation Project. (CITY)
D15. Consideration to Receive and File Report on the Measures Taken to Alleviate the ConditionsWhich
Led the City of Rancho Cucamonga to Enact Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 980 on April 21, 2021,
Establishing a Moratorium on the Approval of Building Permits or Other Entitlements for New Service
Station Uses or the Expansion of Existing Service Station Uses in the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
(CITY)
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Spagnolo, seconded by Council Member Hutchison, to approve
Consent Calendar Items D1 through D15, with Council Member Scott abstaining on item D3, due to her
employment with Southern California Gas Company. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
None.
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
None.
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING ITEM(S) – CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1. Public Hearing for the Approval of the Draft Substantial Amendment to the 19-20, 20-21, and 21-22
Annual Action Plans for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. (CITY)
City Manager Gillison introduced Flavio Nuñez, Management Analyst, who gave the staff report for item G1.
Mayor Michael opened the Public Hearing.
There were no public communications made.
Mayor Michael closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Scott, seconded by Council Member Hutchison, to: 1. Approve the
Substantial Amendments to the 19-20, 20-21, and 21-22 Action Plans, and authorize the City Manager, or
designee, to submit the plan and any necessary amendments to the plan to the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD). 2. Authorize the City Manager, or designee, to negotiate, execute,
and amend contracts with subrecipients, developers, or professional service providers as necessary to
implement CDBG funds under the approved projects identified in the Substantial Amendments to the Action
Plan. 3. Authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute, amend, and submit to the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development all plans and documents necessary to administer the Amended
2021-2022 CDBG projects. Motion carried 5-0.
Mayor Michael recessed the City Council meeting at 7:33 p.m. since item H1 is scheduled to begin at 8:00
p.m.
Page 12
*DRAFT*
March 16, 2022 | 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
Mayor Michael reconvened the meeting at 8:00 p.m.
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
H1. Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 997, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further
Reading, Adjusting the Boundaries of the Four City Council Districts and Adopting a New Official
Council District Map Based on the Results of the 2020 Decennial Census. (ORDINANCE NO. 997)
(CITY)
City Manager Gillison introduced Patricia Bravo-Valdez, MMC, Deputy Director of City Clerk Services, who gave
the Staff Report.
Mayor Michael opened the Public Hearing.
Clotelia Riddell, requested clarification and asked to receive further information on redistricting.
City Manager Gillison referred Ms. Riddell to Lori Sassoon, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services for
further information.
Mayor Michael closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Hutchison, seconded by Council Member Scott, to introduce First Reading
of Ordinance No. 997, by title only and waive further reading.
Linda Troyan, City Clerk Services Director, read the title of Ordinance No. 997, by title only.
VOTES NOW CAST ON MOTION: Moved by Council Member Hutchison, seconded by Council Member
Scott, to introduce First Reading of Ordinance No. 997, by title only and waive further reading. Motion carried
5-0.
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I1. COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
I2.INTER-AGENCY UPDATES
None.
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
None.
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING
None.
L. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Michael adjourned the City Council Meeting at 8:07 p.m. in memory of Sartaj Singh, longtime community
member.
Respectfully submitted,
__________________________________
Linda A. Troyan, MMC
City Clerk Services Director
Approved: ****************
Page 13
DATE:April 20, 2022
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 $1,713,151.44 and City and Fire District Weekly Check
Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to Southern California Gas
Company) in the Total Amount of $6,320,895.51 Dated March 28, 2022
Through April 10, 2022. (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 $1,034,425.31 and $678,726.13 for the City and
the Fire District, respectively. Weekly check register amounts are $5,227,679.71 and
$1,093,215.80 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 14
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
3/28/2022 through 4/10/2022
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00014048 03/30/2022 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP 4,143.65 0.00 4,143.65
AP 00014049 03/30/2022 FIFTH ASSET INC 8,775.00 0.00 8,775.00
AP 00014050 03/30/2022 OPENTEXT INC 741.59 0.00 741.59
AP 00014051 03/31/2022 AIRGAS USA LLC 1,386.28 0.00 1,386.28
AP 00014052 03/31/2022 BIBLIOTHECA LLC 11,934.31 0.00 11,934.31
AP 00014054 03/31/2022 BRODART CO 17,198.71 0.00 17,198.71
AP 00014055 03/31/2022 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATION 915.21 0.00 915.21
AP 00014056 03/31/2022 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 1,022.55 0.00 1,022.55
AP 00014057 03/31/2022 HOSE MAN INC 264.50 0.00 264.50
AP 00014058 03/31/2022 MCFADDEN-DALE HARDWARE 54.74 0.00 54.74
AP 00014059 03/31/2022 MWI ANIMAL HEALTH 368.22 0.00 368.22
AP 00014060 03/31/2022 OFFICE DEPOT 1,127.30 0.00 1,127.30
AP 00014061 03/31/2022 PSA PRINT GROUP 77.58 0.00 77.58
AP 00014062 03/31/2022 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 493.06 0.00 493.06
AP 00014063 04/06/2022 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC 27,710.31 0.00 27,710.31
AP 00014064 04/06/2022 CALIF GOVERNMENT VEBA / RANCHO CUCAMONGA 24,345.14 0.00 24,345.14
AP 00014065 04/06/2022 ELECNOR BELCO ELECTRIC INC 61,067.60 0.00 61,067.60
AP 00014066 04/06/2022 MOFFATT & NICHOL 283,749.61 0.00 283,749.61
AP 00014067 04/06/2022 PROMOTIONS TEES & MORE 2,532.29 0.00 2,532.29
AP 00014068 04/06/2022 RCCEA 1,453.25 0.00 1,453.25
AP 00014069 04/06/2022 RCPFA 12,828.06 0.00 12,828.06
AP 00014070 04/06/2022 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSHON 66,255.44 0.00 66,255.44
AP 00014071 04/06/2022 SAN BERNARDINO CTY SHERIFFS DEPT 3,357,088.07 0.00 3,357,088.07
AP 00014072 04/07/2022 RE ASTORIA 2 LLC 62,373.02 0.00 62,373.02
AP 00014073 04/07/2022 ABC LOCKSMITHS INC 383.25 0.00 383.25
AP 00014074 04/07/2022 BSN SPORTS LLC 372.94 0.00 372.94
AP 00014075 04/07/2022 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 256.30 0.00 256.30
AP 00014076 04/07/2022 CRAFCO INC 1,017.54 0.00 1,017.54
AP 00014077 04/07/2022 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATION 40.06 0.00 40.06
AP 00014078 04/07/2022 HERC RENTALS INC 5,085.82 0.00 5,085.82
AP 00014079 04/07/2022 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 1,060.27 0.00 1,060.27
AP 00014080 04/07/2022 HOSE MAN INC 199.97 0.00 199.97
AP 00014081 04/07/2022 KME FIRE APPARATUS 0.00 2,243.64 2,243.64
***AP 00014082 04/07/2022 MINUTEMAN PRESS 7,083.39 511.27 7,594.66
***AP 00014084 04/07/2022 OFFICE DEPOT 5,032.17 375.05 5,407.22
AP 00014085 04/07/2022 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 6,376.84 0.00 6,376.84
AP 00014086 04/07/2022 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA NEWS GROUP 384.00 0.00 384.00
AP 00014087 04/07/2022 STOTZ EQUIPMENT 492.67 0.00 492.67
AP 00423651 03/30/2022 ACEY DECY EQUIPMENT CO INC 112.10 0.00 112.10
AP 00423652 03/30/2022 ADVANTAGE SEALING SYSTEMS INC 827.35 0.00 827.35
AP 00423653 03/30/2022 ALFARO COMMUNICATIONS CONSTRUCTION INC 4,991.12 0.00 4,991.12
AP 00423654 03/30/2022 AMERON POLE PRODUCTS LLC 76,147.84 0.00 76,147.84
AP 00423655 03/30/2022 AMS PLANNING & RESEARCH CORP 7,400.00 0.00 7,400.00
AP 00423656 03/30/2022 AQUABIO ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES INC 1,450.00 0.00 1,450.00
AP 00423657 03/30/2022 ARCHIBALD PET HOSPITAL 450.00 0.00 450.00
AP 00423658 03/30/2022 AWE ACQUISITION INC 20,942.54 0.00 20,942.54
AP 00423659 03/30/2022 BAKER & TAYLOR LLC 31.23 0.00 31.23
07:25:52
04/11/2022Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:1
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 15
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
3/28/2022 through 4/10/2022
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00423660 03/30/2022 BAY ALARM COMPANY 108.00 0.00 108.00
AP 00423661 03/30/2022 BEST OUTDOOR POWER INLAND LLC 301.89 0.00 301.89
AP 00423662 03/30/2022 BRYAN CAVE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP 205.00 0.00 205.00
***AP 00423665 03/30/2022 C V W D 28,281.16 990.17 29,271.33
AP 00423666 03/30/2022 CALIFORNIA HYDROSTATICS INC 2,981.40 0.00 2,981.40
AP 00423667 03/30/2022 CALIFORNIA LIBRARY ASSOCIATION 395.00 0.00 395.00
AP 00423668 03/30/2022 CALIX INC 9,390.15 0.00 9,390.15
AP 00423669 03/30/2022 CHINO MOWER & EQUIPMENT 2,454.19 0.00 2,454.19
AP 00423670 03/30/2022 CINTAS CORPORATION #150 1,711.70 0.00 1,711.70
AP 00423671 03/30/2022 CLARK DVM CORPORATION, TESS M 1,320.00 0.00 1,320.00
AP 00423672 03/30/2022 COMMUNITY WORKS DESIGN GROUP 101.00 0.00 101.00
AP 00423673 03/30/2022 COST RECOVERY SYSTEMS INC 10,000.00 0.00 10,000.00
AP 00423674 03/30/2022 COTA, TIM 1,031.15 0.00 1,031.15
AP 00423675 03/30/2022 COVETRUS NORTH AMERICA 156.02 0.00 156.02
AP 00423676 03/30/2022 CPS HR CONSULTING 3,175.00 0.00 3,175.00
AP 00423677 03/30/2022 D & K CONCRETE COMPANY 709.00 0.00 709.00
AP 00423678 03/30/2022 DAISYECO INC 415.85 0.00 415.85
AP 00423679 03/30/2022 DEPENDABLE COMPANY INC 62.50 0.00 62.50
AP 00423680 03/30/2022 DOG WASTE DEPOT 729.80 0.00 729.80
AP 00423681 03/30/2022 ECORP CONSULTING INC 1,383.75 0.00 1,383.75
AP 00423682 03/30/2022 EMPIRE ECONOMICS INC 18,500.00 0.00 18,500.00
AP 00423683 03/30/2022 EVERDE GROWERS 805.62 0.00 805.62
AP 00423684 03/30/2022 EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY INC 474.35 0.00 474.35
AP 00423685 03/30/2022 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 25.74 0.00 25.74
AP 00423686 03/30/2022 FRONTIER COMM 4,012.33 0.00 4,012.33
AP 00423687 03/30/2022 FSG ELECTRIC 485.47 0.00 485.47
AP 00423688 03/30/2022 FUEL SERV 1,712.32 0.00 1,712.32
AP 00423689 03/30/2022 GATEWAY PET CEMETERY & CREMATORY 1,095.00 0.00 1,095.00
AP 00423690 03/30/2022 GIMMAL LLC 1,001.54 0.00 1,001.54
***AP 00423691 03/30/2022 GOLDEN STATE RISK MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY 98,707.00 1,272.00 99,979.00
AP 00423692 03/30/2022 GRAINGER 192.87 0.00 192.87
***AP 00423693 03/30/2022 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPANY INC 738.62 46.84 785.46
AP 00423694 03/30/2022 HCI ENVIRONMENTAL & ENGINEERING SVC 8,801.93 0.00 8,801.93
AP 00423695 03/30/2022 HELLO CRITTER 50.00 0.00 50.00
AP 00423696 03/30/2022 HI-WAY SAFETY INC 933.08 0.00 933.08
AP 00423697 03/30/2022 HR GREEN PACIFIC INC 1,568.00 0.00 1,568.00
AP 00423698 03/30/2022 HYDRO TEK SYSTEMS INC 216.95 0.00 216.95
AP 00423699 03/30/2022 IMPETT VETERINARY INC 1,410.00 0.00 1,410.00
AP 00423700 03/30/2022 INLAND TOPSOIL MIXES 646.50 0.00 646.50
AP 00423701 03/30/2022 INTERSTATE ALL BATTERY CENTER 1,284.93 0.00 1,284.93
AP 00423702 03/30/2022 INTERWEST CONSULTING GROUP INC 0.00 1,588.32 1,588.32
AP 00423703 03/30/2022 ITERIS INC 42,470.20 0.00 42,470.20
AP 00423704 03/30/2022 J MRION ROYNON ELEMENTARY PTA 1,050.00 0.00 1,050.00
AP 00423705 03/30/2022 J'S JUICE MASTERS INC 2,613.56 0.00 2,613.56
AP 00423706 03/30/2022 JL GROUP LLC 6,726.61 0.00 6,726.61
AP 00423707 03/30/2022 KOSMONT COMPANIES 4,306.25 0.00 4,306.25
AP 00423708 03/30/2022 LANDSCAPE WEST MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC 153,944.01 0.00 153,944.01
07:25:52
04/11/2022Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:2
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 16
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
3/28/2022 through 4/10/2022
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00423709 03/30/2022 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 210.00 0.00 210.00
AP 00423710 03/30/2022 LEVERAGE INFORMATION SYSTEMS INC 1,049.75 0.00 1,049.75
***AP 00423711 03/30/2022 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 1,938.00 325.00 2,263.00
AP 00423712 03/30/2022 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 795.00 0.00 795.00
***AP 00423714 03/30/2022 LOWES COMPANIES INC 6,275.40 2,697.37 8,972.77
AP 00423715 03/30/2022 LU'S LIGHTHOUSE INC 3,472.84 0.00 3,472.84
AP 00423716 03/30/2022 MARC JONES CONSTRUCTION LLC 91.62 0.00 91.62
AP 00423717 03/30/2022 MARIPOSA LANDSCAPES INC 25,683.99 0.00 25,683.99
AP 00423718 03/30/2022 MARRUFO, JOANNA 514.32 0.00 514.32
AP 00423719 03/30/2022 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY COMPANY 245.76 0.00 245.76
AP 00423720 03/30/2022 MCPHEE, SHERRY 17.99 0.00 17.99
AP 00423721 03/30/2022 MEDLINE INDUSTRIES INC 1,709.35 0.00 1,709.35
AP 00423722 03/30/2022 MISSION REPROGRAPHICS 185.87 0.00 185.87
AP 00423723 03/30/2022 MONTGOMERY HARDWARE CO 759.00 0.00 759.00
AP 00423724 03/30/2022 MYERS TIRE SUPPLY COMPANY 59.76 0.00 59.76
***AP 00423725 03/30/2022 NAPA AUTO PARTS 62.04 536.06 598.10
AP 00423726 03/30/2022 NATIONAL UTILITY LOCATORS LLC 600.00 0.00 600.00
AP 00423727 03/30/2022 NBS 10,000.00 0.00 10,000.00
AP 00423728 03/30/2022 NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS 3,053.99 0.00 3,053.99
AP 00423729 03/30/2022 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CA 148.00 0.00 148.00
AP 00423730 03/30/2022 ONYX ARCHITECTS INC 20,831.26 0.00 20,831.26
AP 00423731 03/30/2022 OPEN APPS INC 2,550.00 0.00 2,550.00
AP 00423732 03/30/2022 PARMER, MICHAEL 255.83 0.00 255.83
AP 00423733 03/30/2022 PROHEALTH PARTNERS A MEDICAL GROUP INC 0.00 150.00 150.00
AP 00423734 03/30/2022 QUADIENT INC 713.03 0.00 713.03
AP 00423735 03/30/2022 QUINN COMPANY 0.00 198.12 198.12
AP 00423736 03/30/2022 RANCHO SMOG CENTER 179.80 0.00 179.80
AP 00423737 03/30/2022 RWB PARTY PROPS INC 1,996.61 0.00 1,996.61
AP 00423738 03/30/2022 SAN BERNARDINO CTY TAX COLLECTOR 300.00 0.00 300.00
AP 00423739 03/30/2022 SIEMENS MOBILITY INC 16,138.99 0.00 16,138.99
AP 00423740 03/30/2022 SILVER & WRIGHT LLP 658.00 0.00 658.00
***AP 00423742 03/30/2022 SOCAL OFFICE TECHNOLOGIES 704.98 11.26 716.24
AP 00423743 03/30/2022 SOUTH COAST AQMD 0.00 582.74 582.74
***AP 00423750 03/30/2022 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19,609.56 1,195.66 20,805.22
AP 00423751 03/30/2022 SUN, LUJIA 24.68 0.00 24.68
AP 00423752 03/30/2022 SYSTEMS SOURCE INC 515.52 0.00 515.52
AP 00423753 03/30/2022 TEAGUE, MONIQUE 39.12 0.00 39.12
AP 00423754 03/30/2022 TIREHUB LLC 802.11 0.00 802.11
AP 00423755 03/30/2022 TOMCO CNG INC 2,742.54 0.00 2,742.54
AP 00423756 03/30/2022 TORO TOWING 450.00 0.00 450.00
AP 00423757 03/30/2022 U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6746022500 12,749.65 0.00 12,749.65
AP 00423758 03/30/2022 U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6746022500 1,008.42 0.00 1,008.42
AP 00423759 03/30/2022 U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6745033700 6,605.00 0.00 6,605.00
AP 00423760 03/30/2022 ULINE 4,354.38 0.00 4,354.38
AP 00423761 03/30/2022 UNITED WAY 45.00 0.00 45.00
AP 00423762 03/30/2022 UPS 95.32 0.00 95.32
AP 00423763 03/30/2022 UPS SUPPLY CHAIN SOLUTIONS INC 708.90 0.00 708.90
07:25:52
04/11/2022Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:3
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 17
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
3/28/2022 through 4/10/2022
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00423764 03/30/2022 VALLEY POWER SYSTEMS INC 0.00 790.01 790.01
AP 00423765 03/30/2022 VCA CENTRAL ANIMAL HOSPITAL 123.49 0.00 123.49
AP 00423766 03/30/2022 VELOCITY TRUCK CENTERS 0.00 824,667.58 824,667.58
AP 00423767 03/30/2022 VICTOR MEDICAL COMPANY 1,515.65 0.00 1,515.65
AP 00423768 03/30/2022 VIRTUAL PROJECT MANAGER LLC 500.00 0.00 500.00
AP 00423769 03/30/2022 VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY 3,945.03 0.00 3,945.03
***AP 00423770 03/30/2022 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 1,146.46 1,152.82 2,299.28
AP 00423771 03/30/2022 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 149.60 0.00 149.60
AP 00423772 03/30/2022 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 29,186.20 0.00 29,186.20
AP 00423773 03/30/2022 WEST END MATERIAL SUPPLY 160.80 0.00 160.80
AP 00423774 03/30/2022 WESTLAND GROUP INC 6,286.25 0.00 6,286.25
AP 00423775 03/30/2022 WILSON & BELL AUTO SERVICE 448.61 0.00 448.61
AP 00423776 03/30/2022 YUNEX LLC 11,063.00 0.00 11,063.00
AP 00423777 03/30/2022 ZOETIS US LLC 290.48 0.00 290.48
AP 00423778 04/05/2022 DELI, THE 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00
AP 00423779 04/05/2022 EJMG ZENDEJAS INC 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00
AP 00423780 04/06/2022 ADVANCED CHEMICAL TRANSPORT INC 2,026.50 0.00 2,026.50
AP 00423781 04/06/2022 AFLAC GROUP INSURANCE 24.58 0.00 24.58
AP 00423782 04/06/2022 ALL WELDING 400.00 0.00 400.00
AP 00423783 04/06/2022 ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT INC 0.00 2,698.50 2,698.50
AP 00423784 04/06/2022 ALTUM GROUP, THE 5,187.50 0.00 5,187.50
AP 00423785 04/06/2022 AUERBACH POLLOCK FRIEDLANDER 1,000.00 0.00 1,000.00
AP 00423786 04/06/2022 AUFBAU CORPORATION 5,920.00 0.00 5,920.00
AP 00423787 04/06/2022 BRAVO-VALDEZ, PATRICIA 61.22 0.00 61.22
AP 00423788 04/06/2022 BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE SERVICES INC 31,043.19 0.00 31,043.19
AP 00423789 04/06/2022 C V W D 178.49 0.00 178.49
***AP 00423790 04/06/2022 C V W D 45.68 106.59 152.27
***AP 00423799 04/06/2022 C V W D 104,239.09 358.67 104,597.76
AP 00423800 04/06/2022 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 305.00 0.00 305.00
AP 00423801 04/06/2022 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 50.00 0.00 50.00
AP 00423802 04/06/2022 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 32.26 0.00 32.26
AP 00423803 04/06/2022 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 342.73 0.00 342.73
AP 00423804 04/06/2022 CalPERS LONG-TERM CARE PROGRAM 177.08 0.00 177.08
AP 00423805 04/06/2022 CalPERS LONG-TERM CARE PROGRAM 177.08 0.00 177.08
AP 00423806 04/06/2022 CAMERON-DANIEL PC 793.00 0.00 793.00
AP 00423807 04/06/2022 CARRASCO CONCRETE 500.00 0.00 500.00
AP 00423808 04/06/2022 CERTIFIED TOWING INC 150.00 0.00 150.00
***AP 00423809 04/06/2022 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS 4,538.74 6,466.37 11,005.11
AP 00423810 04/06/2022 CHINO MOWER & EQUIPMENT 2,689.43 0.00 2,689.43
***AP 00423811 04/06/2022 CINTAS CORPORATION #150 1,890.94 425.76 2,316.70
AP 00423812 04/06/2022 CONSERVE LANDCARE LLC 14,533.24 0.00 14,533.24
***AP 00423813 04/06/2022 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 8,656.40 245.00 8,901.40
AP 00423814 04/06/2022 D & K CONCRETE COMPANY 1,071.04 0.00 1,071.04
AP 00423815 04/06/2022 DANIELS TIRE SERVICE 0.00 3,509.55 3,509.55
AP 00423816 04/06/2022 DATA ARC LLC 4,320.70 0.00 4,320.70
AP 00423817 04/06/2022 DATA TICKET INC 7,708.72 0.00 7,708.72
AP 00423818 04/06/2022 DELTA DENTAL OF CALIFORNIA 1,034.36 0.00 1,034.36
07:25:52
04/11/2022Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:4
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 18
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
3/28/2022 through 4/10/2022
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00423819 04/06/2022 DELTA DENTAL OF CALIFORNIA 40,563.35 0.00 40,563.35
AP 00423820 04/06/2022 ECHEVERRY, DIANA 41.48 0.00 41.48
AP 00423821 04/06/2022 EXPERIAN 52.00 0.00 52.00
AP 00423822 04/06/2022 FASTENAL COMPANY 103.04 0.00 103.04
AP 00423823 04/06/2022 FIRE APPARATUS SOLUTIONS 0.00 607.63 607.63
***AP 00423824 04/06/2022 FRANKLIN TRUCK PARTS INC 730.59 296.50 1,027.09
***AP 00423825 04/06/2022 FRONTIER COMM 1,764.38 523.13 2,287.51
AP 00423826 04/06/2022 GENUINE GENERAL CONTRACTOR 21,420.00 0.00 21,420.00
AP 00423827 04/06/2022 GILLISON, JOHN 29.00 0.00 29.00
AP 00423828 04/06/2022 GLOBALSTAR USA 154.89 0.00 154.89
AP 00423829 04/06/2022 GOSS, ROBERT 0.00 320.00 320.00
AP 00423830 04/06/2022 GRAINGER 88.64 0.00 88.64
AP 00423831 04/06/2022 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPANY INC 0.00 1,036.36 1,036.36
AP 00423832 04/06/2022 HAAKER EQUIPMENT COMPANY 414.90 0.00 414.90
AP 00423833 04/06/2022 HARRIS, TY 0.00 263.62 263.62
AP 00423834 04/06/2022 HERITAGE WELLNESS COLLECTIVE 1,019.00 0.00 1,019.00
AP 00423835 04/06/2022 HILL'S PET NUTRITION SALES INC 586.57 0.00 586.57
AP 00423836 04/06/2022 HONDA YAMAHA HUSQVARNA OF REDLANDS 1,063.70 0.00 1,063.70
AP 00423837 04/06/2022 HR GREEN PACIFIC INC 4,867.50 0.00 4,867.50
AP 00423838 04/06/2022 INTERWEST CONSULTING GROUP INC 0.00 1,726.27 1,726.27
AP 00423839 04/06/2022 KENNEDY EQUIPMENT CO INC 920.66 0.00 920.66
AP 00423840 04/06/2022 LEAL, MICHAEL 0.00 332.00 332.00
AP 00423841 04/06/2022 LEE, RI JA 128.69 0.00 128.69
AP 00423842 04/06/2022 LIFE-ASSIST INC 0.00 7,152.88 7,152.88
AP 00423843 04/06/2022 LU'S LIGHTHOUSE INC 262.22 0.00 262.22
AP 00423844 04/06/2022 MAIN STREET SIGNS 1,421.87 0.00 1,421.87
AP 00423845 04/06/2022 MARIPOSA LANDSCAPES INC 1,416.13 0.00 1,416.13
AP 00423846 04/06/2022 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY COMPANY 0.00 106.39 106.39
AP 00423847 04/06/2022 MCMURRAY STERN INC 0.00 1,200.00 1,200.00
AP 00423848 04/06/2022 MENDOZA, KATHLEEN 6.26 0.00 6.26
AP 00423850 04/06/2022 MIDWEST TAPE 6,335.68 0.00 6,335.68
AP 00423851 04/06/2022 MOLINA, GINA 0.00 28.18 28.18
AP 00423852 04/06/2022 MONTARROYOS, MATT 48.70 0.00 48.70
***AP 00423853 04/06/2022 NAPA AUTO PARTS 119.28 1,260.66 1,379.94
AP 00423854 04/06/2022 NATIONAL CNG & FLEET SERVICE 1,182.89 0.00 1,182.89
AP 00423855 04/06/2022 NATIONAL UTILITY LOCATORS LLC 240.00 0.00 240.00
AP 00423856 04/06/2022 NINYO & MOORE 21,220.75 0.00 21,220.75
AP 00423857 04/06/2022 NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS 1,502.79 0.00 1,502.79
AP 00423858 04/06/2022 ONTRAC 55.61 0.00 55.61
AP 00423859 04/06/2022 ORIEL, JASMIN 133.15 0.00 133.15
AP 00423860 04/06/2022 OROZCO, JOSE 300.00 0.00 300.00
***AP 00423861 04/06/2022 OWEN GROUP LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 77,589.00 25,863.00 103,452.00
AP 00423862 04/06/2022 OWENS, LORRAINE 53.74 0.00 53.74
***AP 00423863 04/06/2022 PFM ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC 25,231.06 2,847.08 28,078.14
AP 00423864 04/06/2022 PINNACLE PETROLEUM INC 0.00 16,820.30 16,820.30
AP 00423865 04/06/2022 PIP PRINTING 983.76 0.00 983.76
AP 00423866 04/06/2022 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC 53.36 0.00 53.36
07:25:52
04/11/2022Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:5
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 19
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
3/28/2022 through 4/10/2022
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00423867 04/06/2022 RBM LOCK & KEY SERVICE 184.79 0.00 184.79
AP 00423868 04/06/2022 RELIABLE ROOFING COMPANY 492.31 0.00 492.31
AP 00423869 04/06/2022 RESCUE RESPONSE GEAR LLC 0.00 271.67 271.67
AP 00423870 04/06/2022 RODRIGUEZ, DANIELA 87.08 0.00 87.08
AP 00423871 04/06/2022 ROJAS, OMAR 36.48 0.00 36.48
AP 00423872 04/06/2022 SAENZ, MAY 69.39 0.00 69.39
AP 00423873 04/06/2022 SAFARILAND LLC 0.00 101,596.68 101,596.68
AP 00423874 04/06/2022 SAFE-ENTRY TECHNICAL INC 0.00 855.00 855.00
AP 00423875 04/06/2022 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 0.00 12,398.64 12,398.64
AP 00423876 04/06/2022 SAVAGE, DONTE 100.00 0.00 100.00
AP 00423877 04/06/2022 SBPEA 2,351.00 0.00 2,351.00
AP 00423878 04/06/2022 SHEAKLEY PENSION ADMINISTRATION 0.00 198.40 198.40
AP 00423879 04/06/2022 SHEAKLEY PENSION ADMINISTRATION 467.95 0.00 467.95
AP 00423880 04/06/2022 SHERIFF'S COURT SERVICES 459.00 0.00 459.00
AP 00423881 04/06/2022 SHOETERIA INC 355.00 0.00 355.00
AP 00423882 04/06/2022 SHRED PROS 0.00 63.00 63.00
AP 00423883 04/06/2022 SIGN SHOP, THE 0.00 853.38 853.38
***AP 00423888 04/06/2022 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 26,331.10 110.26 26,441.36
AP 00423889 04/06/2022 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 54.67 0.00 54.67
AP 00423890 04/06/2022 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 3,308.77 0.00 3,308.77
AP 00423891 04/06/2022 TELEFLEX LLC 0.00 2,370.50 2,370.50
AP 00423892 04/06/2022 THOMPSON BUILDING MATERIALS 142.45 0.00 142.45
***AP 00423893 04/06/2022 TIREHUB LLC 1,336.06 242.68 1,578.74
AP 00423894 04/06/2022 UNITED WAY 45.00 0.00 45.00
AP 00423895 04/06/2022 UNIVERSAL FLEET SUPPLY 0.00 75.40 75.40
AP 00423896 04/06/2022 UPLAND AUTO TRIM 742.50 0.00 742.50
AP 00423897 04/06/2022 UPS 76.66 0.00 76.66
AP 00423898 04/06/2022 VAN DAELE HOMES CORPORATION 18.68 0.00 18.68
AP 00423899 04/06/2022 VELARDE, HOPE 212.00 0.00 212.00
AP 00423900 04/06/2022 VELOCITY TRUCK CENTERS 0.00 1,161.00 1,161.00
AP 00423901 04/06/2022 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA 0.00 5,587.42 5,587.42
AP 00423902 04/06/2022 VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY 77.31 0.00 77.31
AP 00423903 04/06/2022 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 908.06 0.00 908.06
***AP 00423904 04/06/2022 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 1,008.23 374.30 1,382.53
AP 00423905 04/06/2022 WESTERN EXTRICATION SPECIALISTS INC 0.00 46,740.87 46,740.87
AP 00423906 04/06/2022 WILBUR-ELLIS COMPANY 14,671.24 0.00 14,671.24
AP 00423907 04/06/2022 WILSON & BELL AUTO SERVICE 753.10 0.00 753.10
AP 00423908 04/06/2022 XEROX FINANCIAL SERVICES 298.38 0.00 298.38
AP 00423909 04/06/2022 YANEZ, BRITTANY 92.48 0.00 92.48
AP 00423910 04/07/2022 BOOT BARN INC 1,587.01 0.00 1,587.01
AP 00423911 04/07/2022 FINE LINE PRODUCTS 0.00 6,788.25 6,788.25
AP 00423912 04/07/2022 RED WING BUSINESS ADVANTAGE ACCOUNT 1,242.65 0.00 1,242.65
AP 00423913 04/07/2022 SHOETERIA INC 6,473.47 0.00 6,473.47
07:25:52
04/11/2022Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:6
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 20
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
3/28/2022 through 4/10/2022
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
$5,227,679.71
$6,320,895.51
$1,093,215.80
Note:
Grand Total:
Total Fire:
Total City:
*** Check Number includes both City and Fire District expenditures
07:25:52
04/11/2022Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:7
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 21
DATE:April 20, 2022
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 $31,881.86 Dated March 28, 2022 Through April 10, 2022.
(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 $27,993.97 and $3,887.89 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 22
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
3/28/2022 through 4/10/2022
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00014048 03/30/2022 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP 4,143.65 0.00 4,143.65
AP 00014049 03/30/2022 FIFTH ASSET INC 8,775.00 0.00 8,775.00
AP 00014050 03/30/2022 OPENTEXT INC 741.59 0.00 741.59
AP 00014051 03/31/2022 AIRGAS USA LLC 1,386.28 0.00 1,386.28
AP 00014052 03/31/2022 BIBLIOTHECA LLC 11,934.31 0.00 11,934.31
AP 00014054 03/31/2022 BRODART CO 17,198.71 0.00 17,198.71
AP 00014055 03/31/2022 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATION 915.21 0.00 915.21
AP 00014056 03/31/2022 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 1,022.55 0.00 1,022.55
AP 00014057 03/31/2022 HOSE MAN INC 264.50 0.00 264.50
AP 00014058 03/31/2022 MCFADDEN-DALE HARDWARE 54.74 0.00 54.74
AP 00014059 03/31/2022 MWI ANIMAL HEALTH 368.22 0.00 368.22
AP 00014060 03/31/2022 OFFICE DEPOT 1,127.30 0.00 1,127.30
AP 00014061 03/31/2022 PSA PRINT GROUP 77.58 0.00 77.58
AP 00014062 03/31/2022 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 493.06 0.00 493.06
AP 00014063 04/06/2022 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC 27,710.31 0.00 27,710.31
AP 00014064 04/06/2022 CALIF GOVERNMENT VEBA / RANCHO CUCAMONGA 24,345.14 0.00 24,345.14
AP 00014065 04/06/2022 ELECNOR BELCO ELECTRIC INC 61,067.60 0.00 61,067.60
AP 00014066 04/06/2022 MOFFATT & NICHOL 283,749.61 0.00 283,749.61
AP 00014067 04/06/2022 PROMOTIONS TEES & MORE 2,532.29 0.00 2,532.29
AP 00014068 04/06/2022 RCCEA 1,453.25 0.00 1,453.25
AP 00014069 04/06/2022 RCPFA 12,828.06 0.00 12,828.06
AP 00014070 04/06/2022 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSHON 66,255.44 0.00 66,255.44
AP 00014071 04/06/2022 SAN BERNARDINO CTY SHERIFFS DEPT 3,357,088.07 0.00 3,357,088.07
AP 00014072 04/07/2022 RE ASTORIA 2 LLC 62,373.02 0.00 62,373.02
AP 00014073 04/07/2022 ABC LOCKSMITHS INC 383.25 0.00 383.25
AP 00014074 04/07/2022 BSN SPORTS LLC 372.94 0.00 372.94
AP 00014075 04/07/2022 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 256.30 0.00 256.30
AP 00014076 04/07/2022 CRAFCO INC 1,017.54 0.00 1,017.54
AP 00014077 04/07/2022 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATION 40.06 0.00 40.06
AP 00014078 04/07/2022 HERC RENTALS INC 5,085.82 0.00 5,085.82
AP 00014079 04/07/2022 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 1,060.27 0.00 1,060.27
AP 00014080 04/07/2022 HOSE MAN INC 199.97 0.00 199.97
AP 00014081 04/07/2022 KME FIRE APPARATUS 0.00 2,243.64 2,243.64
***AP 00014082 04/07/2022 MINUTEMAN PRESS 7,083.39 511.27 7,594.66
***AP 00014084 04/07/2022 OFFICE DEPOT 5,032.17 375.05 5,407.22
AP 00014085 04/07/2022 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 6,376.84 0.00 6,376.84
AP 00014086 04/07/2022 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA NEWS GROUP 384.00 0.00 384.00
AP 00014087 04/07/2022 STOTZ EQUIPMENT 492.67 0.00 492.67
AP 00423651 03/30/2022 ACEY DECY EQUIPMENT CO INC 112.10 0.00 112.10
AP 00423652 03/30/2022 ADVANTAGE SEALING SYSTEMS INC 827.35 0.00 827.35
AP 00423653 03/30/2022 ALFARO COMMUNICATIONS CONSTRUCTION INC 4,991.12 0.00 4,991.12
AP 00423654 03/30/2022 AMERON POLE PRODUCTS LLC 76,147.84 0.00 76,147.84
AP 00423655 03/30/2022 AMS PLANNING & RESEARCH CORP 7,400.00 0.00 7,400.00
AP 00423656 03/30/2022 AQUABIO ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES INC 1,450.00 0.00 1,450.00
AP 00423657 03/30/2022 ARCHIBALD PET HOSPITAL 450.00 0.00 450.00
AP 00423658 03/30/2022 AWE ACQUISITION INC 20,942.54 0.00 20,942.54
AP 00423659 03/30/2022 BAKER & TAYLOR LLC 31.23 0.00 31.23
07:25:52
04/11/2022Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:1
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 23
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
3/28/2022 through 4/10/2022
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00423660 03/30/2022 BAY ALARM COMPANY 108.00 0.00 108.00
AP 00423661 03/30/2022 BEST OUTDOOR POWER INLAND LLC 301.89 0.00 301.89
AP 00423662 03/30/2022 BRYAN CAVE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP 205.00 0.00 205.00
***AP 00423665 03/30/2022 C V W D 28,281.16 990.17 29,271.33
AP 00423666 03/30/2022 CALIFORNIA HYDROSTATICS INC 2,981.40 0.00 2,981.40
AP 00423667 03/30/2022 CALIFORNIA LIBRARY ASSOCIATION 395.00 0.00 395.00
AP 00423668 03/30/2022 CALIX INC 9,390.15 0.00 9,390.15
AP 00423669 03/30/2022 CHINO MOWER & EQUIPMENT 2,454.19 0.00 2,454.19
AP 00423670 03/30/2022 CINTAS CORPORATION #150 1,711.70 0.00 1,711.70
AP 00423671 03/30/2022 CLARK DVM CORPORATION, TESS M 1,320.00 0.00 1,320.00
AP 00423672 03/30/2022 COMMUNITY WORKS DESIGN GROUP 101.00 0.00 101.00
AP 00423673 03/30/2022 COST RECOVERY SYSTEMS INC 10,000.00 0.00 10,000.00
AP 00423674 03/30/2022 COTA, TIM 1,031.15 0.00 1,031.15
AP 00423675 03/30/2022 COVETRUS NORTH AMERICA 156.02 0.00 156.02
AP 00423676 03/30/2022 CPS HR CONSULTING 3,175.00 0.00 3,175.00
AP 00423677 03/30/2022 D & K CONCRETE COMPANY 709.00 0.00 709.00
AP 00423678 03/30/2022 DAISYECO INC 415.85 0.00 415.85
AP 00423679 03/30/2022 DEPENDABLE COMPANY INC 62.50 0.00 62.50
AP 00423680 03/30/2022 DOG WASTE DEPOT 729.80 0.00 729.80
AP 00423681 03/30/2022 ECORP CONSULTING INC 1,383.75 0.00 1,383.75
AP 00423682 03/30/2022 EMPIRE ECONOMICS INC 18,500.00 0.00 18,500.00
AP 00423683 03/30/2022 EVERDE GROWERS 805.62 0.00 805.62
AP 00423684 03/30/2022 EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY INC 474.35 0.00 474.35
AP 00423685 03/30/2022 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 25.74 0.00 25.74
AP 00423686 03/30/2022 FRONTIER COMM 4,012.33 0.00 4,012.33
AP 00423687 03/30/2022 FSG ELECTRIC 485.47 0.00 485.47
AP 00423688 03/30/2022 FUEL SERV 1,712.32 0.00 1,712.32
AP 00423689 03/30/2022 GATEWAY PET CEMETERY & CREMATORY 1,095.00 0.00 1,095.00
AP 00423690 03/30/2022 GIMMAL LLC 1,001.54 0.00 1,001.54
***AP 00423691 03/30/2022 GOLDEN STATE RISK MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY 98,707.00 1,272.00 99,979.00
AP 00423692 03/30/2022 GRAINGER 192.87 0.00 192.87
***AP 00423693 03/30/2022 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPANY INC 738.62 46.84 785.46
AP 00423694 03/30/2022 HCI ENVIRONMENTAL & ENGINEERING SVC 8,801.93 0.00 8,801.93
AP 00423695 03/30/2022 HELLO CRITTER 50.00 0.00 50.00
AP 00423696 03/30/2022 HI-WAY SAFETY INC 933.08 0.00 933.08
AP 00423697 03/30/2022 HR GREEN PACIFIC INC 1,568.00 0.00 1,568.00
AP 00423698 03/30/2022 HYDRO TEK SYSTEMS INC 216.95 0.00 216.95
AP 00423699 03/30/2022 IMPETT VETERINARY INC 1,410.00 0.00 1,410.00
AP 00423700 03/30/2022 INLAND TOPSOIL MIXES 646.50 0.00 646.50
AP 00423701 03/30/2022 INTERSTATE ALL BATTERY CENTER 1,284.93 0.00 1,284.93
AP 00423702 03/30/2022 INTERWEST CONSULTING GROUP INC 0.00 1,588.32 1,588.32
AP 00423703 03/30/2022 ITERIS INC 42,470.20 0.00 42,470.20
AP 00423704 03/30/2022 J MRION ROYNON ELEMENTARY PTA 1,050.00 0.00 1,050.00
AP 00423705 03/30/2022 J'S JUICE MASTERS INC 2,613.56 0.00 2,613.56
AP 00423706 03/30/2022 JL GROUP LLC 6,726.61 0.00 6,726.61
AP 00423707 03/30/2022 KOSMONT COMPANIES 4,306.25 0.00 4,306.25
AP 00423708 03/30/2022 LANDSCAPE WEST MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC 153,944.01 0.00 153,944.01
07:25:52
04/11/2022Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:2
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 24
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
3/28/2022 through 4/10/2022
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00423709 03/30/2022 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 210.00 0.00 210.00
AP 00423710 03/30/2022 LEVERAGE INFORMATION SYSTEMS INC 1,049.75 0.00 1,049.75
***AP 00423711 03/30/2022 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 1,938.00 325.00 2,263.00
AP 00423712 03/30/2022 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 795.00 0.00 795.00
***AP 00423714 03/30/2022 LOWES COMPANIES INC 6,275.40 2,697.37 8,972.77
AP 00423715 03/30/2022 LU'S LIGHTHOUSE INC 3,472.84 0.00 3,472.84
AP 00423716 03/30/2022 MARC JONES CONSTRUCTION LLC 91.62 0.00 91.62
AP 00423717 03/30/2022 MARIPOSA LANDSCAPES INC 25,683.99 0.00 25,683.99
AP 00423718 03/30/2022 MARRUFO, JOANNA 514.32 0.00 514.32
AP 00423719 03/30/2022 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY COMPANY 245.76 0.00 245.76
AP 00423720 03/30/2022 MCPHEE, SHERRY 17.99 0.00 17.99
AP 00423721 03/30/2022 MEDLINE INDUSTRIES INC 1,709.35 0.00 1,709.35
AP 00423722 03/30/2022 MISSION REPROGRAPHICS 185.87 0.00 185.87
AP 00423723 03/30/2022 MONTGOMERY HARDWARE CO 759.00 0.00 759.00
AP 00423724 03/30/2022 MYERS TIRE SUPPLY COMPANY 59.76 0.00 59.76
***AP 00423725 03/30/2022 NAPA AUTO PARTS 62.04 536.06 598.10
AP 00423726 03/30/2022 NATIONAL UTILITY LOCATORS LLC 600.00 0.00 600.00
AP 00423727 03/30/2022 NBS 10,000.00 0.00 10,000.00
AP 00423728 03/30/2022 NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS 3,053.99 0.00 3,053.99
AP 00423729 03/30/2022 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CA 148.00 0.00 148.00
AP 00423730 03/30/2022 ONYX ARCHITECTS INC 20,831.26 0.00 20,831.26
AP 00423731 03/30/2022 OPEN APPS INC 2,550.00 0.00 2,550.00
AP 00423732 03/30/2022 PARMER, MICHAEL 255.83 0.00 255.83
AP 00423733 03/30/2022 PROHEALTH PARTNERS A MEDICAL GROUP INC 0.00 150.00 150.00
AP 00423734 03/30/2022 QUADIENT INC 713.03 0.00 713.03
AP 00423735 03/30/2022 QUINN COMPANY 0.00 198.12 198.12
AP 00423736 03/30/2022 RANCHO SMOG CENTER 179.80 0.00 179.80
AP 00423737 03/30/2022 RWB PARTY PROPS INC 1,996.61 0.00 1,996.61
AP 00423738 03/30/2022 SAN BERNARDINO CTY TAX COLLECTOR 300.00 0.00 300.00
AP 00423739 03/30/2022 SIEMENS MOBILITY INC 16,138.99 0.00 16,138.99
AP 00423740 03/30/2022 SILVER & WRIGHT LLP 658.00 0.00 658.00
***AP 00423742 03/30/2022 SOCAL OFFICE TECHNOLOGIES 704.98 11.26 716.24
AP 00423743 03/30/2022 SOUTH COAST AQMD 0.00 582.74 582.74
***AP 00423750 03/30/2022 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19,609.56 1,195.66 20,805.22
AP 00423751 03/30/2022 SUN, LUJIA 24.68 0.00 24.68
AP 00423752 03/30/2022 SYSTEMS SOURCE INC 515.52 0.00 515.52
AP 00423753 03/30/2022 TEAGUE, MONIQUE 39.12 0.00 39.12
AP 00423754 03/30/2022 TIREHUB LLC 802.11 0.00 802.11
AP 00423755 03/30/2022 TOMCO CNG INC 2,742.54 0.00 2,742.54
AP 00423756 03/30/2022 TORO TOWING 450.00 0.00 450.00
AP 00423757 03/30/2022 U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6746022500 12,749.65 0.00 12,749.65
AP 00423758 03/30/2022 U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6746022500 1,008.42 0.00 1,008.42
AP 00423759 03/30/2022 U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6745033700 6,605.00 0.00 6,605.00
AP 00423760 03/30/2022 ULINE 4,354.38 0.00 4,354.38
AP 00423761 03/30/2022 UNITED WAY 45.00 0.00 45.00
AP 00423762 03/30/2022 UPS 95.32 0.00 95.32
AP 00423763 03/30/2022 UPS SUPPLY CHAIN SOLUTIONS INC 708.90 0.00 708.90
07:25:52
04/11/2022Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:3
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 25
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
3/28/2022 through 4/10/2022
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00423764 03/30/2022 VALLEY POWER SYSTEMS INC 0.00 790.01 790.01
AP 00423765 03/30/2022 VCA CENTRAL ANIMAL HOSPITAL 123.49 0.00 123.49
AP 00423766 03/30/2022 VELOCITY TRUCK CENTERS 0.00 824,667.58 824,667.58
AP 00423767 03/30/2022 VICTOR MEDICAL COMPANY 1,515.65 0.00 1,515.65
AP 00423768 03/30/2022 VIRTUAL PROJECT MANAGER LLC 500.00 0.00 500.00
AP 00423769 03/30/2022 VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY 3,945.03 0.00 3,945.03
***AP 00423770 03/30/2022 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 1,146.46 1,152.82 2,299.28
AP 00423771 03/30/2022 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 149.60 0.00 149.60
AP 00423772 03/30/2022 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 29,186.20 0.00 29,186.20
AP 00423773 03/30/2022 WEST END MATERIAL SUPPLY 160.80 0.00 160.80
AP 00423774 03/30/2022 WESTLAND GROUP INC 6,286.25 0.00 6,286.25
AP 00423775 03/30/2022 WILSON & BELL AUTO SERVICE 448.61 0.00 448.61
AP 00423776 03/30/2022 YUNEX LLC 11,063.00 0.00 11,063.00
AP 00423777 03/30/2022 ZOETIS US LLC 290.48 0.00 290.48
AP 00423778 04/05/2022 DELI, THE 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00
AP 00423779 04/05/2022 EJMG ZENDEJAS INC 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00
AP 00423780 04/06/2022 ADVANCED CHEMICAL TRANSPORT INC 2,026.50 0.00 2,026.50
AP 00423781 04/06/2022 AFLAC GROUP INSURANCE 24.58 0.00 24.58
AP 00423782 04/06/2022 ALL WELDING 400.00 0.00 400.00
AP 00423783 04/06/2022 ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT INC 0.00 2,698.50 2,698.50
AP 00423784 04/06/2022 ALTUM GROUP, THE 5,187.50 0.00 5,187.50
AP 00423785 04/06/2022 AUERBACH POLLOCK FRIEDLANDER 1,000.00 0.00 1,000.00
AP 00423786 04/06/2022 AUFBAU CORPORATION 5,920.00 0.00 5,920.00
AP 00423787 04/06/2022 BRAVO-VALDEZ, PATRICIA 61.22 0.00 61.22
AP 00423788 04/06/2022 BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE SERVICES INC 31,043.19 0.00 31,043.19
AP 00423789 04/06/2022 C V W D 178.49 0.00 178.49
***AP 00423790 04/06/2022 C V W D 45.68 106.59 152.27
***AP 00423799 04/06/2022 C V W D 104,239.09 358.67 104,597.76
AP 00423800 04/06/2022 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 305.00 0.00 305.00
AP 00423801 04/06/2022 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 50.00 0.00 50.00
AP 00423802 04/06/2022 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 32.26 0.00 32.26
AP 00423803 04/06/2022 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 342.73 0.00 342.73
AP 00423804 04/06/2022 CalPERS LONG-TERM CARE PROGRAM 177.08 0.00 177.08
AP 00423805 04/06/2022 CalPERS LONG-TERM CARE PROGRAM 177.08 0.00 177.08
AP 00423806 04/06/2022 CAMERON-DANIEL PC 793.00 0.00 793.00
AP 00423807 04/06/2022 CARRASCO CONCRETE 500.00 0.00 500.00
AP 00423808 04/06/2022 CERTIFIED TOWING INC 150.00 0.00 150.00
***AP 00423809 04/06/2022 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS 4,538.74 6,466.37 11,005.11
AP 00423810 04/06/2022 CHINO MOWER & EQUIPMENT 2,689.43 0.00 2,689.43
***AP 00423811 04/06/2022 CINTAS CORPORATION #150 1,890.94 425.76 2,316.70
AP 00423812 04/06/2022 CONSERVE LANDCARE LLC 14,533.24 0.00 14,533.24
***AP 00423813 04/06/2022 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 8,656.40 245.00 8,901.40
AP 00423814 04/06/2022 D & K CONCRETE COMPANY 1,071.04 0.00 1,071.04
AP 00423815 04/06/2022 DANIELS TIRE SERVICE 0.00 3,509.55 3,509.55
AP 00423816 04/06/2022 DATA ARC LLC 4,320.70 0.00 4,320.70
AP 00423817 04/06/2022 DATA TICKET INC 7,708.72 0.00 7,708.72
AP 00423818 04/06/2022 DELTA DENTAL OF CALIFORNIA 1,034.36 0.00 1,034.36
07:25:52
04/11/2022Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:4
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
3/28/2022 through 4/10/2022
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00423819 04/06/2022 DELTA DENTAL OF CALIFORNIA 40,563.35 0.00 40,563.35
AP 00423820 04/06/2022 ECHEVERRY, DIANA 41.48 0.00 41.48
AP 00423821 04/06/2022 EXPERIAN 52.00 0.00 52.00
AP 00423822 04/06/2022 FASTENAL COMPANY 103.04 0.00 103.04
AP 00423823 04/06/2022 FIRE APPARATUS SOLUTIONS 0.00 607.63 607.63
***AP 00423824 04/06/2022 FRANKLIN TRUCK PARTS INC 730.59 296.50 1,027.09
***AP 00423825 04/06/2022 FRONTIER COMM 1,764.38 523.13 2,287.51
AP 00423826 04/06/2022 GENUINE GENERAL CONTRACTOR 21,420.00 0.00 21,420.00
AP 00423827 04/06/2022 GILLISON, JOHN 29.00 0.00 29.00
AP 00423828 04/06/2022 GLOBALSTAR USA 154.89 0.00 154.89
AP 00423829 04/06/2022 GOSS, ROBERT 0.00 320.00 320.00
AP 00423830 04/06/2022 GRAINGER 88.64 0.00 88.64
AP 00423831 04/06/2022 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPANY INC 0.00 1,036.36 1,036.36
AP 00423832 04/06/2022 HAAKER EQUIPMENT COMPANY 414.90 0.00 414.90
AP 00423833 04/06/2022 HARRIS, TY 0.00 263.62 263.62
AP 00423834 04/06/2022 HERITAGE WELLNESS COLLECTIVE 1,019.00 0.00 1,019.00
AP 00423835 04/06/2022 HILL'S PET NUTRITION SALES INC 586.57 0.00 586.57
AP 00423836 04/06/2022 HONDA YAMAHA HUSQVARNA OF REDLANDS 1,063.70 0.00 1,063.70
AP 00423837 04/06/2022 HR GREEN PACIFIC INC 4,867.50 0.00 4,867.50
AP 00423838 04/06/2022 INTERWEST CONSULTING GROUP INC 0.00 1,726.27 1,726.27
AP 00423839 04/06/2022 KENNEDY EQUIPMENT CO INC 920.66 0.00 920.66
AP 00423840 04/06/2022 LEAL, MICHAEL 0.00 332.00 332.00
AP 00423841 04/06/2022 LEE, RI JA 128.69 0.00 128.69
AP 00423842 04/06/2022 LIFE-ASSIST INC 0.00 7,152.88 7,152.88
AP 00423843 04/06/2022 LU'S LIGHTHOUSE INC 262.22 0.00 262.22
AP 00423844 04/06/2022 MAIN STREET SIGNS 1,421.87 0.00 1,421.87
AP 00423845 04/06/2022 MARIPOSA LANDSCAPES INC 1,416.13 0.00 1,416.13
AP 00423846 04/06/2022 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY COMPANY 0.00 106.39 106.39
AP 00423847 04/06/2022 MCMURRAY STERN INC 0.00 1,200.00 1,200.00
AP 00423848 04/06/2022 MENDOZA, KATHLEEN 6.26 0.00 6.26
AP 00423850 04/06/2022 MIDWEST TAPE 6,335.68 0.00 6,335.68
AP 00423851 04/06/2022 MOLINA, GINA 0.00 28.18 28.18
AP 00423852 04/06/2022 MONTARROYOS, MATT 48.70 0.00 48.70
***AP 00423853 04/06/2022 NAPA AUTO PARTS 119.28 1,260.66 1,379.94
AP 00423854 04/06/2022 NATIONAL CNG & FLEET SERVICE 1,182.89 0.00 1,182.89
AP 00423855 04/06/2022 NATIONAL UTILITY LOCATORS LLC 240.00 0.00 240.00
AP 00423856 04/06/2022 NINYO & MOORE 21,220.75 0.00 21,220.75
AP 00423857 04/06/2022 NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS 1,502.79 0.00 1,502.79
AP 00423858 04/06/2022 ONTRAC 55.61 0.00 55.61
AP 00423859 04/06/2022 ORIEL, JASMIN 133.15 0.00 133.15
AP 00423860 04/06/2022 OROZCO, JOSE 300.00 0.00 300.00
***AP 00423861 04/06/2022 OWEN GROUP LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 77,589.00 25,863.00 103,452.00
AP 00423862 04/06/2022 OWENS, LORRAINE 53.74 0.00 53.74
***AP 00423863 04/06/2022 PFM ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC 25,231.06 2,847.08 28,078.14
AP 00423864 04/06/2022 PINNACLE PETROLEUM INC 0.00 16,820.30 16,820.30
AP 00423865 04/06/2022 PIP PRINTING 983.76 0.00 983.76
AP 00423866 04/06/2022 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC 53.36 0.00 53.36
07:25:52
04/11/2022Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:5
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
3/28/2022 through 4/10/2022
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00423867 04/06/2022 RBM LOCK & KEY SERVICE 184.79 0.00 184.79
AP 00423868 04/06/2022 RELIABLE ROOFING COMPANY 492.31 0.00 492.31
AP 00423869 04/06/2022 RESCUE RESPONSE GEAR LLC 0.00 271.67 271.67
AP 00423870 04/06/2022 RODRIGUEZ, DANIELA 87.08 0.00 87.08
AP 00423871 04/06/2022 ROJAS, OMAR 36.48 0.00 36.48
AP 00423872 04/06/2022 SAENZ, MAY 69.39 0.00 69.39
AP 00423873 04/06/2022 SAFARILAND LLC 0.00 101,596.68 101,596.68
AP 00423874 04/06/2022 SAFE-ENTRY TECHNICAL INC 0.00 855.00 855.00
AP 00423875 04/06/2022 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 0.00 12,398.64 12,398.64
AP 00423876 04/06/2022 SAVAGE, DONTE 100.00 0.00 100.00
AP 00423877 04/06/2022 SBPEA 2,351.00 0.00 2,351.00
AP 00423878 04/06/2022 SHEAKLEY PENSION ADMINISTRATION 0.00 198.40 198.40
AP 00423879 04/06/2022 SHEAKLEY PENSION ADMINISTRATION 467.95 0.00 467.95
AP 00423880 04/06/2022 SHERIFF'S COURT SERVICES 459.00 0.00 459.00
AP 00423881 04/06/2022 SHOETERIA INC 355.00 0.00 355.00
AP 00423882 04/06/2022 SHRED PROS 0.00 63.00 63.00
AP 00423883 04/06/2022 SIGN SHOP, THE 0.00 853.38 853.38
***AP 00423888 04/06/2022 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 26,331.10 110.26 26,441.36
AP 00423889 04/06/2022 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 54.67 0.00 54.67
AP 00423890 04/06/2022 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 3,308.77 0.00 3,308.77
AP 00423891 04/06/2022 TELEFLEX LLC 0.00 2,370.50 2,370.50
AP 00423892 04/06/2022 THOMPSON BUILDING MATERIALS 142.45 0.00 142.45
***AP 00423893 04/06/2022 TIREHUB LLC 1,336.06 242.68 1,578.74
AP 00423894 04/06/2022 UNITED WAY 45.00 0.00 45.00
AP 00423895 04/06/2022 UNIVERSAL FLEET SUPPLY 0.00 75.40 75.40
AP 00423896 04/06/2022 UPLAND AUTO TRIM 742.50 0.00 742.50
AP 00423897 04/06/2022 UPS 76.66 0.00 76.66
AP 00423898 04/06/2022 VAN DAELE HOMES CORPORATION 18.68 0.00 18.68
AP 00423899 04/06/2022 VELARDE, HOPE 212.00 0.00 212.00
AP 00423900 04/06/2022 VELOCITY TRUCK CENTERS 0.00 1,161.00 1,161.00
AP 00423901 04/06/2022 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA 0.00 5,587.42 5,587.42
AP 00423902 04/06/2022 VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY 77.31 0.00 77.31
AP 00423903 04/06/2022 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 908.06 0.00 908.06
***AP 00423904 04/06/2022 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 1,008.23 374.30 1,382.53
AP 00423905 04/06/2022 WESTERN EXTRICATION SPECIALISTS INC 0.00 46,740.87 46,740.87
AP 00423906 04/06/2022 WILBUR-ELLIS COMPANY 14,671.24 0.00 14,671.24
AP 00423907 04/06/2022 WILSON & BELL AUTO SERVICE 753.10 0.00 753.10
AP 00423908 04/06/2022 XEROX FINANCIAL SERVICES 298.38 0.00 298.38
AP 00423909 04/06/2022 YANEZ, BRITTANY 92.48 0.00 92.48
AP 00423910 04/07/2022 BOOT BARN INC 1,587.01 0.00 1,587.01
AP 00423911 04/07/2022 FINE LINE PRODUCTS 0.00 6,788.25 6,788.25
AP 00423912 04/07/2022 RED WING BUSINESS ADVANTAGE ACCOUNT 1,242.65 0.00 1,242.65
AP 00423913 04/07/2022 SHOETERIA INC 6,473.47 0.00 6,473.47
07:25:52
04/11/2022Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:6
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
3/28/2022 through 4/10/2022
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
$5,227,679.71
$6,320,895.51
$1,093,215.80
Note:
Grand Total:
Total Fire:
Total City:
*** Check Number includes both City and Fire District expenditures
07:25:52
04/11/2022Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:7
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 29
DATE:April 20, 2022
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
Jason Shields, Management Analyst II
SUBJECT:Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of
March 31, 2022 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 March 31, 2022.
BACKGROUND:
The attached investment schedules as of March 31, 2022 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 30
Page 31
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022
Account Statement
Consolidated Summary Statement
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Investment Allocation
Investment Type Closing Market Value Percent
11,172,294.74 3.20 Asset-Backed Security
36,770,313.40 10.53 Federal Agency Bond / Note
45,337,066.49 12.98 Corporate Note
1,197,109.70 0.34 Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
994,565.00 0.28 Municipal Bond / Note
8,117,743.29 2.32 Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
167,291,966.02 47.90 U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
72,626,826.86 20.79 Local Agency Investment Fund
5,790,771.20 1.66 Passbook/Checking Accounts
$349,298,656.70 Total 100.00%
Portfolio Summary
and Income
Closing
Market ValuePortfolio Holdings
Cash Dividends
PFMAM Managed Account (118,366.58) 270,881,058.64
Local Agency Investment Fund 0.00 72,626,826.86
Passbook/Checking Accounts 0.00 5,790,771.20
($118,366.58)$349,298,656.70 Total
Maturity Distribution (Fixed Income Holdings)
Portfolio Holdings Closing Market Value Percent
78,417,598.06
0.00
0.00
500,330.00
12,918,608.02
81,550,223.04
63,597,520.39
66,477,892.74
45,836,484.45
0.00
22.45
0.00
0.00
0.14
3.70
23.35
18.21
19.03
13.12
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 $349,298,656.70
761
100.00%
Weighted Average Days to Maturity
Sector Allocation
3.20%
ABS
10.53%
Fed Agy Bond /
Note
12.98%
Corporate Note
0.34%
Cert of Deposit -
FDIC
0.28%
Muni Bond / Note
2.32%
Supra-National
Agency Bond / Note
47.90%
US TSY Bond / Note
20.79%
Local Agency
Investment Fund
1.66%
Passbook/Checking
Accounts
Summary Page 1
Page 32
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Summary Statement
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
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)
$275,445,950.91
0.00
(10,851,014.07)
11,481,413.04
0.00
(5,195,291.24)
$270,881,058.64
222,621.52
(19,937.33)
(321,050.77)
($118,366.58)
Total
283,004,408.71
589,197.76
10,885,292.86
0.00
188,342.73
(11,501,350.37)
(282,550,563.05)
(548,989.06)
Total Accrual Basis Earnings $66,339.58
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
10,885,292.86
188,342.73
0.00
(11,501,350.37)
0.00
0.00
Cash Balance
$129,180.89 Closing Cash Balance
Account 73340000 Page 1
Page 33
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Portfolio Summary and Statistics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Account Summary
Percent Par Value Market ValueDescription
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note 173,525,000.00 167,291,966.02 61.76
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note 8,410,000.00 8,117,743.29 3.00
Municipal Bond / Note 1,000,000.00 994,565.00 0.37
Federal Agency Bond / Note 38,745,000.00 36,770,313.40 13.57
Corporate Note 46,850,000.00 45,337,066.49 16.74
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured 1,225,000.00 1,197,109.70 0.44
Asset-Backed Security 11,510,000.00 11,172,294.74 4.12
Managed Account Sub-Total 281,265,000.00 270,881,058.64 100.00%
Accrued Interest 589,197.76
Total Portfolio 281,265,000.00 271,470,256.40
Unsettled Trades 0.00 0.00
Sector Allocation
4.12%
ABS
0.44%
Cert of Deposit -
FDIC
16.74%
Corporate Note
13.57%
Fed Agy Bond /
Note
0.37%
Muni Bond / Note
3.00%
Supra-National
Agency Bond / Note
61.76%
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
0.18%
4.77%
30.11%
23.48%24.54%
16.92%
0.00%
Maturity Distribution Characteristics
Yield to Maturity at Cost
Yield to Maturity at Market
Weighted Average Days to Maturity 981
0.67%
2.35%
Account 73340000 Page 2
Page 34
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Issuer Summary
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Credit Quality (S&P Ratings)
3.15%
A
0.53%
A+
4.38%
A-
1.61%
AA
78.61%
AA+
1.98%
AA-
6.15%
AAA
2.18%
BBB+
1.41%
NR
Issuer Summary
Percentof HoldingsIssuer
Market Value
1,397,294.70 0.52 AMAZON.COM INC
1,717,548.00 0.63 AMERICAN EXPRESS CO
1,850,340.00 0.68 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE
7,870,690.98 2.91 APPLE INC
1,560,033.03 0.58 ASTRAZENECA PLC
491,222.97 0.18 BMW FINANCIAL SERVICES NA LLC
1,785,905.54 0.66 CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORP
2,392,674.91 0.88 CARMAX AUTO OWNER TRUST
1,854,386.00 0.68 CATERPILLAR INC
638,115.72 0.24 CHARLES SCHWAB
232,655.43 0.09 CHIPPEWA VALLEY BANK
1,426,176.00 0.53 CITIGROUP INC
1,889,368.00 0.70 DEERE & COMPANY
237,386.63 0.09 ENERBANK USA
25,505,901.80 9.41 FANNIE MAE
2,809,785.00 1.04 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS
8,454,626.60 3.12 FREDDIE MAC
1,626,676.80 0.60 GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP
922,423.74 0.34 GM FINANCIAL CONSUMER AUTOMOBILE TRUST
503,803.08 0.19 GM FINANCIAL LEASINGTRUST
1,769,620.10 0.65 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC
1,239,794.38 0.46 HONDA AUTO RECEIVABLES
1,471,102.40 0.54 HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL
274,238.58 0.10 HYUNDAI AUTO LEASE SECURITIZATION TRUST
2,007,707.40 0.74 HYUNDAI AUTO RECEIVABLES
1,692,088.35 0.62 IBM CORP
5,041,441.23 1.86 INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
3,076,302.06 1.14 INTL BANK OF RECONSTRUCTION AND DEV
1,576,138.84 0.58 JP MORGAN CHASE & CO
877,697.00 0.32 KUBOTA CREDIT OWNER TRUST
1,606,632.00 0.59 LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP
233,039.59 0.09 MEDALLION BANK UTAH
Account 73340000 Page 3
Page 35
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Issuer Summary
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Percentof HoldingsIssuer
Market Value
178,287.35 0.07 MERCEDES-BENZ AUTO LEASE TRUST
1,237,290.84 0.46 MORGAN STANLEY
2,926,170.00 1.08 NOVARTIS AG
2,954,648.75 1.09 Roche Holding AG
994,565.00 0.37 SAN MATEO-FOSTER CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
295,206.15 0.11 STATE STREET CORPORATION
342,985.74 0.13 TARGET CORP
1,556,970.33 0.57 THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORPORATION
1,022,759.27 0.38 TOYOTA MOTOR CORP
1,947,720.60 0.72 TRUIST FIN CORP
419,233.76 0.15 UNILEVER PLC
167,291,966.02 61.75 UNITED STATES TREASURY
2,443,615.00 0.90 US BANCORP
989,762.76 0.37 VOLKSWAGEN OF AMERICA
247,060.21 0.09 WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
$270,881,058.64 Total 100.00%
Account 73340000 Page 4
Page 36
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
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 MarketTrade Settle
Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2018 2.375% 01/31/2023
1,409,406.32 1,425,518.67 5,511.05 1,467,101.56 11/20/2011/17/20AaaAA+ 1,400,000.00 9128283U2 0.19
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2018 2.625% 02/28/2023
1,825,837.50 1,850,126.91 4,131.52 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
4,244,023.65 4,303,037.10 5,543.48 4,371,523.44 01/26/2101/25/21AaaAA+ 4,250,000.00 912828P79 0.13
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/15/2020 0.500% 03/15/2023
4,945,312.50 5,016,043.79 1,154.89 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
5,050,781.00 5,139,009.44 57,734.81 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
3,487,968.75 3,559,159.68 19,062.50 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
6,372,031.25 6,508,125.00 4,776.79 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
5,848,125.00 5,993,364.68 1,243.09 5,990,156.25 08/09/2108/06/21AaaAA+ 6,000,000.00 91282CCN9 0.21
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 08/15/2020 0.125% 08/15/2023
4,868,750.00 4,996,055.89 776.93 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
4,857,812.50 4,994,019.05 288.72 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
1,944,687.60 1,999,350.72 13.66 1,999,140.63 10/06/2110/04/21AaaAA+ 2,000,000.00 91282CDA6 0.27
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 0.375% 10/31/2023
5,833,125.00 5,986,583.56 9,447.51 5,983,125.00 11/03/2111/01/21AaaAA+ 6,000,000.00 91282CDD0 0.52
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 12/31/2021 0.750% 12/31/2023
3,409,218.75 3,498,192.48 6,598.76 3,497,949.22 01/05/2201/03/22AaaAA+ 3,500,000.00 91282CDR9 0.78
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 12/31/2021 0.750% 12/31/2023
4,870,312.50 4,988,779.66 9,426.79 4,987,304.69 01/07/2201/06/22AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 91282CDR9 0.88
Account 73340000 Page 5
Page 37
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
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 MarketTrade Settle
Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2019 2.375% 02/29/2024
8,007,500.00 8,335,963.52 16,521.74 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
3,586,757.81 3,747,631.70 30,358.01 3,836,983.59 11/05/2010/30/20AaaAA+ 3,615,000.00 912828X70 0.23
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/15/2021 0.250% 05/15/2024
1,815,984.28 1,882,320.84 1,797.65 1,878,921.88 11/03/2111/01/21AaaAA+ 1,900,000.00 91282CCC3 0.69
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/15/2021 0.375% 07/15/2024
4,771,875.00 5,005,154.66 3,936.46 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
5,581,406.25 5,868,864.67 16,446.13 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
3,809,375.20 3,996,981.20 1,864.64 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
2,181,157.81 2,299,434.48 2,440.22 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
1,330,000.00 1,395,751.47 242.53 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
5,596,488.00 5,913,890.21 327.75 6,075,872.27 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 5,645,000.00 9128282Y5 0.21
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/31/2019 1.500% 10/31/2024
2,438,672.00 2,576,407.66 15,745.86 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
4,870,312.50 5,159,241.86 25,137.36 5,239,843.75 11/24/2011/23/20AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 912828YV6 0.30
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 12/31/2019 1.750% 12/31/2024
980,000.00 1,019,538.95 4,399.17 1,021,210.94 01/05/2201/03/22AaaAA+ 1,000,000.00 912828YY0 1.03
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2018 2.750% 02/28/2025
6,039,375.00 6,437,565.06 14,347.83 6,663,750.00 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 6,000,000.00 9128283Z1 0.23
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/31/2020 0.500% 03/31/2025
2,591,015.63 2,763,299.53 37.57 2,769,335.94 11/20/2011/17/20AaaAA+ 2,750,000.00 912828ZF0 0.34
Account 73340000 Page 6
Page 38
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
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 MarketTrade Settle
Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 04/30/2020 0.375% 04/30/2025
1,966,453.02 2,046,033.42 3,306.63 2,042,003.91 01/07/2201/06/22AaaAA+ 2,100,000.00 912828ZL7 1.23
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2020 0.250% 07/31/2025
4,171,640.40 4,484,283.53 1,864.64 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
6,489,218.40 6,968,021.77 2,900.55 6,956,250.00 01/08/2101/06/21AaaAA+ 7,000,000.00 91282CAB7 0.39
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2020 0.375% 11/30/2025
2,773,125.00 2,838,203.66 3,770.60 2,833,007.81 02/17/2202/16/22AaaAA+ 3,000,000.00 91282CAZ4 1.91
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 12/31/2020 0.375% 12/31/2025
3,600,796.68 3,849,265.67 3,676.45 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
3,819,228.70 4,087,779.92 2,576.31 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
5,528,437.20 5,925,135.67 3,729.28 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
2,450,007.68 2,629,470.80 1,152.17 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
2,797,500.00 2,978,848.30 61.48 2,973,632.81 04/06/2104/02/21AaaAA+ 3,000,000.00 91282CBT7 0.93
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/16/2016 1.625% 05/15/2026
3,401,074.40 3,505,089.53 21,678.26 3,504,758.79 03/07/2203/03/22AaaAA+ 3,525,000.00 912828R36 1.77
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/31/2021 0.750% 05/31/2026
2,790,000.00 2,858,682.66 7,541.21 2,854,687.50 02/17/2202/16/22AaaAA+ 3,000,000.00 91282CCF6 1.93
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/31/2021 0.750% 05/31/2026
5,673,000.00 6,088,860.68 15,333.79 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
1,845,625.00 1,987,824.29 2,071.82 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
2,768,437.50 2,993,084.72 3,107.74 2,992,031.25 08/03/2108/02/21AaaAA+ 3,000,000.00 91282CCP4 0.68
Account 73340000 Page 7
Page 39
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
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 MarketTrade Settle
Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 1.125% 10/31/2026
376,250.00 397,757.63 1,889.50 397,578.13 11/18/2111/17/21AaaAA+ 400,000.00 91282CDG3 1.25
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 11/30/2021 1.250% 11/30/2026
2,738,489.06 2,902,716.39 12,128.78 2,903,255.27 12/03/2112/01/21AaaAA+ 2,895,000.00 91282CDK4 1.19
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 12/31/2021 1.250% 12/31/2026
1,535,371.18 1,617,077.28 5,106.18 1,616,684.57 01/05/2201/03/22AaaAA+ 1,625,000.00 91282CDQ1 1.36
351,208.81 167,291,966.02 174,817,548.36 0.50 176,202,585.01 173,525,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
INTL BK OF RECON AND DEV NOTE
DTD 04/20/2021 0.126% 04/20/2023
1,712,366.76 1,743,099.91 983.31 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
1,363,935.30 1,408,333.37 1,243.54 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
3,575,308.23 3,752,703.01 417.22 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
1,466,133.00 1,556,048.72 1,239.58 1,576,950.00 02/23/2102/19/21AaaAAA 1,500,000.00 4581X0DK1 0.47
3,883.65 8,117,743.29 8,460,185.01 0.42 8,477,527.65 8,410,000.00 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
500,330.00 500,349.00 968.33 502,300.00 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
494,235.00 501,410.18 1,055.00 503,385.00 05/19/2005/19/20AaaAA+ 500,000.00 799055QS0 1.05
2,023.33 994,565.00 1,001,759.18 1.00 1,005,685.00 1,000,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Account 73340000 Page 8
Page 40
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
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 MarketTrade Settle
Par
Federal Agency Bond / Note
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 07/10/2020 0.250% 07/10/2023
4,164,375.78 4,260,546.46 2,396.25 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
4,672,204.80 4,801,429.95 766.67 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
1,647,405.40 1,699,184.74 1,711.81 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
4,258,293.60 4,397,233.66 3,788.89 4,394,984.00 11/25/2011/23/20AaaAA+ 4,400,000.00 3135G06H1 0.29
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 06/19/2020 0.500% 06/17/2025
2,712,212.60 2,899,453.24 4,181.67 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
4,684,305.00 5,012,118.05 7,222.22 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
2,809,785.00 3,004,674.42 3,708.33 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
2,344,767.50 2,499,338.99 3,038.19 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
1,859,606.00 1,991,856.90 750.00 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
2,135,016.40 2,295,175.91 191.67 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
1,293,795.32 1,388,351.67 2,780.00 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
4,188,546.00 4,495,951.05 9,000.00 4,494,465.00 12/04/2012/02/20AaaAA+ 4,500,000.00 3135G06G3 0.53
39,535.70 36,770,313.40 38,745,315.04 0.39 38,747,050.45 38,745,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Corporate Note
APPLE INC GLOBAL NOTES
DTD 05/03/2013 2.400% 05/03/2023
3,413,885.94 3,378,720.14 33,448.00 3,348,574.20 05/06/1905/06/19AaaAA+ 3,390,000.00 037833AK6 2.73
Account 73340000 Page 9
Page 41
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
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 MarketTrade Settle
Par
Corporate Note
APPLE INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/11/2020 0.750% 05/11/2023
1,420,403.04 1,441,752.26 4,200.00 1,444,737.60 05/11/2005/11/20AaaAA+ 1,440,000.00 037833DV9 0.64
APPLE INC (CALLABLE) BONDS
DTD 02/09/2017 3.000% 02/09/2024
3,036,402.00 3,006,702.26 13,000.00 3,019,140.00 02/11/1902/11/19AaaAA+ 3,000,000.00 037833CG3 2.86
CHARLES SCHWAB CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/18/2021 0.750% 03/18/2024
638,115.72 659,784.11 178.75 659,670.00 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
1,397,294.70 1,453,503.69 2,528.06 1,452,875.70 05/12/2105/10/21A1AA 1,455,000.00 023135BW5 0.50
AMERICAN EXPRESS CO CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE
DTD 07/30/2019 2.500% 07/30/2024
1,717,548.00 1,778,369.32 7,307.29 1,786,755.00 11/23/2111/19/21A2BBB+ 1,725,000.00 025816CG2 1.14
UNILEVER CAPITAL CORP (CALLABLE)
CORPORA
DTD 08/12/2021 0.626% 08/12/2024
419,233.76 440,000.00 374.90 440,000.00 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
491,222.97 514,963.46 525.73 514,953.65 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
2,443,615.00 2,592,700.73 9,965.28 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
2,926,170.00 3,094,009.08 6,854.17 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
582,881.84 610,000.00 429.29 610,000.00 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
1,606,632.00 1,682,166.10 3,866.67 1,714,864.00 03/09/2103/05/21A3A- 1,600,000.00 539830BE8 1.05
Account 73340000 Page 10
Page 42
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
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 MarketTrade Settle
Par
Corporate Note
ROCHE HOLDINGS INC (CALLABLE)
CORPORATE
DTD 03/10/2022 2.132% 03/10/2025
2,954,648.75 3,015,000.00 3,749.66 3,015,000.00 03/10/2203/03/22Aa3AA 3,015,000.00 771196BT8 2.13
GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP (CALLABLE)
CORP NO
DTD 05/11/2018 3.500% 05/15/2025
1,626,676.80 1,715,693.51 21,155.56 1,757,296.00 03/09/2103/05/21A3A- 1,600,000.00 369550BG2 1.09
CITIGROUP INC CORP NOTE (CALLABLE)
DTD 11/03/2021 1.281% 11/03/2025
1,426,176.00 1,501,334.96 7,899.50 1,501,545.00 11/03/2111/01/21A3BBB+ 1,500,000.00 172967ND9 1.25
BANK OF NY MELLON CORP (CALLABLE)
CORPOR
DTD 01/28/2021 0.750% 01/28/2026
1,556,970.33 1,684,237.20 2,211.56 1,684,005.85 02/01/2101/28/21A1A 1,685,000.00 06406RAQ0 0.76
STATE STREET CORP CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 02/07/2022 1.746% 02/06/2026
295,206.15 305,000.00 798.80 305,000.00 02/07/2202/02/22A1A 305,000.00 857477BR3 1.75
GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 02/12/2021 0.855% 02/12/2026
1,769,620.10 1,903,007.57 2,211.13 1,903,876.00 02/17/2102/12/21A2BBB+ 1,900,000.00 38141GXS8 0.81
IBM CORP
DTD 05/15/2019 3.300% 05/15/2026
1,692,088.35 1,824,062.35 20,881.67 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
1,560,033.03 1,682,970.40 6,867.50 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
1,022,759.27 1,102,829.03 3,556.72 1,102,546.90 09/13/2109/08/21A1A+ 1,105,000.00 89236TJK2 1.17
MORGAN STANLEY CORP NOTES
DTD 07/25/2016 3.125% 07/27/2026
990,323.00 1,056,943.23 5,555.56 1,062,320.00 11/03/2111/01/21A1BBB+ 1,000,000.00 61761J3R8 1.75
AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 09/09/2021 1.300% 09/09/2026
1,850,340.00 1,972,739.97 1,588.89 1,970,740.00 12/03/2112/01/21A3A- 2,000,000.00 02665WDZ1 1.62
Account 73340000 Page 11
Page 43
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
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 MarketTrade Settle
Par
Corporate Note
CATERPILLAR FINL SERVICE CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 09/14/2021 1.150% 09/14/2026
1,854,386.00 1,969,845.52 1,086.11 1,967,640.00 12/03/2112/01/21A2A 2,000,000.00 14913R2Q9 1.50
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO CORP NOTES
DTD 07/21/2016 2.950% 10/01/2026
993,257.00 1,052,499.75 14,750.00 1,057,540.00 11/03/2111/01/21A2A- 1,000,000.00 46625HRV4 1.72
JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 01/10/2022 1.700% 01/11/2027
1,889,368.00 1,989,202.37 7,650.00 1,988,720.00 01/13/2201/11/22A2A 2,000,000.00 24422EWA3 1.82
TARGET CORP CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 01/24/2022 1.950% 01/15/2027
342,985.74 354,418.75 1,288.35 354,396.50 01/24/2201/19/22A2A 355,000.00 87612EBM7 1.99
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL (CALLABLE)
CORP
DTD 08/16/2021 1.100% 03/01/2027
1,471,102.40 1,513,114.11 1,466.67 1,511,904.00 03/07/2203/03/22A2A 1,600,000.00 438516CE4 2.27
TRUIST FINANCIAL CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/02/2021 1.267% 03/02/2027
1,947,720.60 1,950,141.76 2,143.34 1,949,808.00 03/28/2203/24/22A3A- 2,100,000.00 89788MAD4 2.83
187,539.16 45,337,066.49 47,245,711.63 1.50 47,438,065.40 46,850,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
WELLS FARGO BANK NA
DTD 01/29/2020 1.900% 01/30/2023
247,060.21 245,000.00 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
246,967.84 245,000.00 757.49 245,000.00 01/30/2001/30/20NRNR 245,000.00 61760A6Q7 1.85
ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
237,386.63 245,000.00 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
232,655.43 245,000.00 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
233,039.59 245,000.00 7.38 245,000.00 07/30/2007/30/20NRNR 245,000.00 58404DHQ7 0.55
Account 73340000 Page 12
Page 44
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
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 MarketTrade Settle
Par
837.36 1,197,109.70 1,225,000.00 1.07 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
178,287.35 179,989.00 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
274,238.58 279,983.82 52.27 279,976.70 01/20/2101/12/21AaaAAA 280,000.00 44891TAD8 0.42
GMALT 2021-1 A4
DTD 02/24/2021 0.330% 02/20/2025
503,803.08 514,943.64 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
518,375.19 529,992.86 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
526,123.35 539,955.18 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
367,644.68 374,955.35 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
877,697.00 924,970.61 230.22 924,965.13 07/28/2107/20/21AaaNR 925,000.00 50117XAE2 0.56
CARMX 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.340% 12/15/2025
117,059.28 119,981.99 18.13 119,976.29 01/27/2101/20/21NRAAA 120,000.00 14316NAC3 0.34
HAROT 2021-4 A3
DTD 11/24/2021 0.880% 01/21/2026
721,419.19 744,856.18 182.11 744,842.95 11/24/2111/16/21AaaNR 745,000.00 43815GAC3 0.89
CARMX 2021-2 A3
DTD 04/21/2021 0.520% 02/17/2026
791,273.12 809,859.61 187.20 809,825.45 04/21/2104/13/21NRAAA 810,000.00 14314QAC8 0.52
CARMX 2021-3 A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.550% 06/15/2026
1,484,342.51 1,529,783.19 374.00 1,529,748.32 07/28/2107/21/21AaaAAA 1,530,000.00 14317DAC4 0.55
VALET 2021-1 A3
DTD 12/13/2021 1.020% 06/22/2026
989,762.76 1,024,962.47 319.46 1,024,959.82 12/13/2112/07/21AaaAAA 1,025,000.00 92868KAC7 1.02
HART 2022-A A3
DTD 03/16/2022 2.220% 10/15/2026
1,481,584.05 1,499,942.80 1,387.50 1,499,942.25 03/16/2203/09/22NRAAA 1,500,000.00 448977AD0 2.22
GMCAR 2022-1 A3
DTD 01/19/2022 1.260% 11/16/2026
554,779.06 569,952.49 299.25 569,950.47 01/19/2201/11/22NRAAA 570,000.00 380146AC4 1.26
Account 73340000 Page 13
Page 45
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
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 MarketTrade Settle
Par
Asset-Backed Security
COMET 2021-A3 A3
DTD 11/30/2021 1.040% 11/16/2026
1,785,905.54 1,864,760.30 862.04 1,864,743.00 11/30/2111/18/21NRAAA 1,865,000.00 14041NFY2 1.04
4,169.75 11,172,294.74 11,508,889.49 0.90 11,508,708.21 11,510,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
281,265,000.00 284,604,621.72 0.67 589,197.76 283,004,408.71 270,881,058.64 Managed Account Sub-Total
$281,265,000.00 $284,604,621.72 $589,197.76 $283,004,408.71 $270,881,058.64 0.67%
$271,470,256.40
$589,197.76
Total Investments
Accrued Interest
Securities Sub-Total
Account 73340000 Page 14
Page 46
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDate PriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
(16,112.35)(57,695.24) 1,409,406.32 100.67 CITIGRP 1,400,000.00 9128283U2US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2018 2.375% 01/31/2023
1.56 0.83
(24,289.41)(84,419.53) 1,825,837.50 100.88 CITIGRP 1,810,000.00 9128284A5US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2018 2.625% 02/28/2023
1.66 0.91
(59,013.45)(127,499.79) 4,244,023.65 99.86 BNP_PAR 4,250,000.00 912828P79US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/29/2016 1.500% 02/28/2023
1.65 0.91
(70,731.29)(94,335.94) 4,945,312.50 98.91 WELLS_F 5,000,000.00 912828ZD5US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/15/2020 0.500% 03/15/2023
1.66 0.96
(88,228.44)(279,101.81) 5,050,781.00 101.02 CITIGRP 5,000,000.00 9128284L1US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 04/30/2018 2.750% 04/30/2023
1.80 1.06
(71,190.93)(142,460.94) 3,487,968.75 99.66 NOMURA 3,500,000.00 912828R69US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2016 1.625% 05/31/2023
1.92 1.16
(136,093.75)(146,250.00) 6,372,031.25 98.03 WELLS_F 6,500,000.00 912828ZU7US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 06/15/2020 0.250% 06/15/2023
1.91 1.21
(145,239.68)(142,031.25) 5,848,125.00 97.47 MERRILL 6,000,000.00 91282CCN9US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.125% 07/31/2023
2.05 1.34
(127,305.89)(123,046.88) 4,868,750.00 97.38 HSBC 5,000,000.00 91282CAF8US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 08/15/2020 0.125% 08/15/2023
2.07 1.38
(136,206.55)(130,664.06) 4,857,812.50 97.16 NOMURA 5,000,000.00 91282CAK7US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 09/15/2020 0.125% 09/15/2023
2.12 1.46
(54,663.12)(54,453.03) 1,944,687.60 97.23 NOMURA 2,000,000.00 91282CDA6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 09/30/2021 0.250% 09/30/2023
2.13 1.50
(153,458.56)(150,000.00) 5,833,125.00 97.22 CITIGRP 6,000,000.00 91282CDD0US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 0.375% 10/31/2023
2.17 1.58
(88,973.73)(88,730.47) 3,409,218.75 97.41 JPM_CHA 3,500,000.00 91282CDR9US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 12/31/2021 0.750% 12/31/2023
2.27 1.74
(118,467.16)(116,992.19) 4,870,312.50 97.41 CITIGRP 5,000,000.00 91282CDR9US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 12/31/2021 0.750% 12/31/2023
2.27 1.74
(328,463.52)(592,812.50) 8,007,500.00 100.09 RBS 8,000,000.00 9128286G0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2019 2.375% 02/29/2024
2.32 1.88
(160,873.89)(250,225.78) 3,586,757.81 99.22 MORGAN_ 3,615,000.00 912828X70US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/01/2017 2.000% 04/30/2024
2.39 2.03
(66,336.56)(62,937.60) 1,815,984.28 95.58 CITIGRP 1,900,000.00 91282CCC3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/15/2021 0.250% 05/15/2024
2.40 2.12
Account 73340000 Page 15
Page 47
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDate PriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
(233,279.66)(234,765.63) 4,771,875.00 95.44 NOMURA 5,000,000.00 91282CCL3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/15/2021 0.375% 07/15/2024
2.43 2.28
(287,458.42)(413,732.81) 5,581,406.25 98.44 WELLS_F 5,670,000.00 912828Y87US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2019 1.750% 07/31/2024
2.44 2.29
(187,606.00)(186,874.80) 3,809,375.20 95.23 NOMURA 4,000,000.00 91282CCT6US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 08/15/2021 0.375% 08/15/2024
2.45 2.37
(118,276.67)(144,784.97) 2,181,157.81 97.16 BNP_PAR 2,245,000.00 912828YE4US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 08/31/2019 1.250% 08/31/2024
2.47 2.38
(65,751.47)(64,914.06) 1,330,000.00 95.00 MERRILL 1,400,000.00 91282CCX7US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 09/15/2021 0.375% 09/15/2024
2.49 2.45
(317,402.21)(479,384.27) 5,596,488.00 99.14 CITIGRP 5,645,000.00 9128282Y5US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/02/2017 2.125% 09/30/2024
2.48 2.45
(137,735.66)(178,124.88) 2,438,672.00 97.55 CITIGRP 2,500,000.00 912828YM6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/31/2019 1.500% 10/31/2024
2.49 2.53
(288,929.36)(369,531.25) 4,870,312.50 97.41 NOMURA 5,000,000.00 912828YV6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2019 1.500% 11/30/2024
2.51 2.61
(39,538.95)(41,210.94) 980,000.00 98.00 MORGAN_ 1,000,000.00 912828YY0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 12/31/2019 1.750% 12/31/2024
2.51 2.69
(398,190.06)(624,375.00) 6,039,375.00 100.66 MERRILL 6,000,000.00 9128283Z1US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2018 2.750% 02/28/2025
2.51 2.82
(172,283.90)(178,320.31) 2,591,015.63 94.22 MORGAN_ 2,750,000.00 912828ZF0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/31/2020 0.500% 03/31/2025
2.51 2.98
(79,580.40)(75,550.89) 1,966,453.02 93.64 NOMURA 2,100,000.00 912828ZL7US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 04/30/2020 0.375% 04/30/2025
2.53 3.06
(312,643.13)(307,090.07) 4,171,640.40 92.70 BNP_PAR 4,500,000.00 91282CAB7US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2020 0.250% 07/31/2025
2.54 3.32
(478,803.37)(467,031.60) 6,489,218.40 92.70 JPM_CHA 7,000,000.00 91282CAB7US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2020 0.250% 07/31/2025
2.54 3.32
(65,078.66)(59,882.81) 2,773,125.00 92.44 NOMURA 3,000,000.00 91282CAZ4US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2020 0.375% 11/30/2025
2.55 3.64
(248,468.99)(236,285.35) 3,600,796.68 92.33 HSBC 3,900,000.00 91282CBC4US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 12/31/2020 0.375% 12/31/2025
2.53 3.72
(268,551.22)(257,605.48) 3,819,228.70 92.14 CITIGRP 4,145,000.00 91282CBH3US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
2.54 3.81
Account 73340000 Page 16
Page 48
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDate PriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
(396,698.47)(384,140.93) 5,528,437.20 92.14 RBS 6,000,000.00 91282CBH3US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
2.54 3.81
(179,463.12)(173,802.87) 2,450,007.68 92.45 CITIGRP 2,650,000.00 91282CBQ3US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2021 0.500% 02/28/2026
2.54 3.88
(181,348.30)(176,132.81) 2,797,500.00 93.25 NOMURA 3,000,000.00 91282CBT7US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 03/31/2021 0.750% 03/31/2026
2.54 3.95
(104,015.13)(103,684.39) 3,401,074.40 96.48 CITIGRP 3,525,000.00 912828R36US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/16/2016 1.625% 05/15/2026
2.53 3.98
(68,682.66)(64,687.50) 2,790,000.00 93.00 JPM_CHA 3,000,000.00 91282CCF6US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/31/2021 0.750% 05/31/2026
2.53 4.10
(415,860.68)(413,656.25) 5,673,000.00 93.00 RBC 6,100,000.00 91282CCF6US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/31/2021 0.750% 05/31/2026
2.53 4.10
(142,199.29)(140,390.63) 1,845,625.00 92.28 CITIGRP 2,000,000.00 91282CCP4US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.625% 07/31/2026
2.51 4.28
(224,647.22)(223,593.75) 2,768,437.50 92.28 CITIGRP 3,000,000.00 91282CCP4US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.625% 07/31/2026
2.51 4.28
(21,507.63)(21,328.13) 376,250.00 94.06 CITIGRP 400,000.00 91282CDG3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 1.125% 10/31/2026
2.50 4.45
(164,227.33)(164,766.21) 2,738,489.06 94.59 NOMURA 2,895,000.00 91282CDK4US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 11/30/2021 1.250% 11/30/2026
2.48 4.52
(81,706.10)(81,313.39) 1,535,371.18 94.48 JPM_CHA 1,625,000.00 91282CDQ1US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 12/31/2021 1.250% 12/31/2026
2.49 4.61
(8,910,618.99) 2.31 (7,525,582.34) 167,291,966.02 173,525,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.48
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
(30,733.15)(29,021.09) 1,712,366.76 98.13 TD 1,745,000.00 459058JV6INTL BK OF RECON AND DEV NOTE
DTD 04/20/2021 0.126% 04/20/2023
1.92 1.06
(44,398.07)(43,033.20) 1,363,935.30 96.73 TD 1,410,000.00 459058JM6INTL BK RECON & DEVELOP NOTES
DTD 11/24/2020 0.250% 11/24/2023
2.28 1.65
(177,394.78)(176,913.07) 3,575,308.23 95.21 JPM_CHA 3,755,000.00 4581X0DZ8INTER-AMERICAN DEVEL BK NOTES
DTD 09/23/2021 0.500% 09/23/2024
2.50 2.47
Account 73340000 Page 17
Page 49
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDate PriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
(89,915.72)(110,817.00) 1,466,133.00 97.74 MORGAN_ 1,500,000.00 4581X0DK1INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
NOTES
DTD 01/16/2020 1.750% 03/14/2025
2.55 2.89
(359,784.36) 2.35 (342,441.72) 8,117,743.29 8,410,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.11
Municipal Bond / Note
(19.00)(1,970.00) 500,330.00 100.07 NEW ACC 500,000.00 799055QR2SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST, CA TXBL
GO BO
DTD 05/19/2020 1.162% 08/01/2022
0.96 0.34
(7,175.18)(9,150.00) 494,235.00 98.85 NEW ACC 500,000.00 799055QS0SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST, CA TXBL
GO BO
DTD 05/19/2020 1.266% 08/01/2023
2.15 1.33
(11,120.00) 1.55 (7,194.18) 994,565.00 1,000,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 0.83
Federal Agency Bond / Note
(96,170.68)(96,817.02) 4,164,375.78 97.76 MORGAN_ 4,260,000.00 3135G05G4FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 07/10/2020 0.250% 07/10/2023
2.04 1.28
(129,225.15)(130,723.20) 4,672,204.80 97.34 KEYBANC 4,800,000.00 3137EAEW5FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 09/04/2020 0.250% 09/08/2023
2.14 1.44
(51,779.34)(51,064.60) 1,647,405.40 96.91 CITIGRP 1,700,000.00 3137EAEZ8FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 11/05/2020 0.250% 11/06/2023
2.23 1.60
(138,940.06)(136,690.40) 4,258,293.60 96.78 NOMURA 4,400,000.00 3135G06H1FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/25/2020 0.250% 11/27/2023
2.24 1.65
(187,240.64)(189,590.65) 2,712,212.60 93.69 NEW ACC 2,895,000.00 3135G04Z3FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 06/19/2020 0.500% 06/17/2025
2.56 3.19
(327,813.05)(333,495.00) 4,684,305.00 93.69 HSBC 5,000,000.00 3135G04Z3FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 06/19/2020 0.500% 06/17/2025
2.56 3.19
(194,889.42)(197,325.00) 2,809,785.00 93.66 NEW ACC 3,000,000.00 3133ELR71FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK NOTES
DTD 07/02/2020 0.500% 07/02/2025
2.54 3.23
(154,571.49)(154,232.50) 2,344,767.50 93.79 07/21/22NEW ACC 2,500,000.00 3136G4ZJ5FANNIE MAE NOTES (CALLABLE)
DTD 07/21/2020 0.625% 07/21/2025
2.60 0.32
Account 73340000 Page 18
Page 50
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDate PriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Federal Agency Bond / Note
(132,250.90)(128,894.00) 1,859,606.00 92.98 NOMURA 2,000,000.00 3135G05X7FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 08/27/2020 0.375% 08/25/2025
2.54 3.38
(160,159.51)(158,060.60) 2,135,016.40 92.83 CITIGRP 2,300,000.00 3137EAEX3FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 09/25/2020 0.375% 09/23/2025
2.54 3.46
(94,556.35)(93,925.08) 1,293,795.32 93.08 BMO 1,390,000.00 3135G06G3FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/12/2020 0.500% 11/07/2025
2.52 3.57
(307,405.05)(305,919.00) 4,188,546.00 93.08 JEFFERI 4,500,000.00 3135G06G3FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/12/2020 0.500% 11/07/2025
2.52 3.57
(1,976,737.05) 2.39 (1,975,001.64) 36,770,313.40 38,745,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.40
Corporate Note
35,165.80 65,311.74 3,413,885.94 100.70 NEW ACC 3,390,000.00 037833AK6APPLE INC GLOBAL NOTES
DTD 05/03/2013 2.400% 05/03/2023
1.74 1.07
(21,349.22)(24,334.56) 1,420,403.04 98.64 NEW ACC 1,440,000.00 037833DV9APPLE INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/11/2020 0.750% 05/11/2023
1.99 1.11
29,699.74 17,262.00 3,036,402.00 101.21 12/09/23NEW ACC 3,000,000.00 037833CG3APPLE INC (CALLABLE) BONDS
DTD 02/09/2017 3.000% 02/09/2024
2.33 1.66
(21,668.39)(21,554.28) 638,115.72 96.68 02/18/24CSFB 660,000.00 808513BN4CHARLES SCHWAB CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/18/2021 0.750% 03/18/2024
2.49 1.87
(56,208.99)(55,581.00) 1,397,294.70 96.03 JPM_CHA 1,455,000.00 023135BW5AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/12/2021 0.450% 05/12/2024
2.38 2.10
(60,821.32)(69,207.00) 1,717,548.00 99.57 06/30/24MORGAN_ 1,725,000.00 025816CG2AMERICAN EXPRESS CO CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE
DTD 07/30/2019 2.500% 07/30/2024
2.69 2.19
(20,766.24)(20,766.24) 419,233.76 95.28 08/12/22DEUTSCH 440,000.00 904764BN6UNILEVER CAPITAL CORP (CALLABLE)
CORPORA
DTD 08/12/2021 0.626% 08/12/2024
2.70 0.37
(23,740.49)(23,730.68) 491,222.97 95.38 GOLDMAN 515,000.00 05565EBU8BMW US CAPITAL LLC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 08/12/2021 0.750% 08/12/2024
2.78 2.35
(149,085.73)(196,835.00) 2,443,615.00 97.74 12/20/24US_BANC 2,500,000.00 90331HPL1US BANK NA CINCINNATI (CALLABLE)
CORPORA
DTD 01/21/2020 2.050% 01/21/2025
2.89 2.65
Account 73340000 Page 19
Page 51
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDate PriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Corporate Note
(167,839.08)(218,580.00) 2,926,170.00 97.54 01/14/25US_BANC 3,000,000.00 66989HAP3NOVARTIS CAPITAL CORP
DTD 02/14/2020 1.750% 02/14/2025
2.65 2.73
(27,118.16)(27,118.16) 582,881.84 95.55 02/16/24JPM_CHA 610,000.00 46647PBY1JPMORGAN CHASE & CO CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE
DTD 02/16/2021 0.563% 02/16/2025
2.16 1.87
(75,534.10)(108,232.00) 1,606,632.00 100.41 12/01/24MERRILL 1,600,000.00 539830BE8LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 02/20/2015 2.900% 03/01/2025
2.75 2.58
(60,351.25)(60,351.25) 2,954,648.75 98.00 02/10/25DEUTSCH 3,015,000.00 771196BT8ROCHE HOLDINGS INC (CALLABLE)
CORPORATE
DTD 03/10/2022 2.132% 03/10/2025
2.85 2.79
(89,016.71)(130,619.20) 1,626,676.80 101.67 03/15/25SUSQ 1,600,000.00 369550BG2GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP (CALLABLE)
CORP NO
DTD 05/11/2018 3.500% 05/15/2025
2.94 2.80
(75,158.96)(75,369.00) 1,426,176.00 95.08 11/03/24MORGAN_ 1,500,000.00 172967ND9CITIGROUP INC CORP NOTE (CALLABLE)
DTD 11/03/2021 1.281% 11/03/2025
2.73 2.54
(127,266.87)(127,035.52) 1,556,970.33 92.40 12/28/25MITSU 1,685,000.00 06406RAQ0BANK OF NY MELLON CORP (CALLABLE)
CORPOR
DTD 01/28/2021 0.750% 01/28/2026
2.86 3.69
(9,793.85)(9,793.85) 295,206.15 96.79 GOLDMAN 305,000.00 857477BR3STATE STREET CORP CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 02/07/2022 1.746% 02/06/2026
2.63 3.73
(133,387.47)(134,255.90) 1,769,620.10 93.14 MERRILL 1,900,000.00 38141GXS8GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 02/12/2021 0.855% 02/12/2026
2.74 3.80
(131,974.00)(152,773.40) 1,692,088.35 101.02 MORGAN_ 1,675,000.00 459200JZ5IBM CORP
DTD 05/15/2019 3.300% 05/15/2026
3.03 3.85
(122,937.37)(124,062.22) 1,560,033.03 93.14 04/28/26MORGAN_ 1,675,000.00 04636NAA1ASTRAZENECA FINANCE LLC (CALLABLE)
CORP
DTD 05/28/2021 1.200% 05/28/2026
2.97 3.97
(80,069.76)(79,787.63) 1,022,759.27 92.56 JPM_CHA 1,105,000.00 89236TJK2TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP
CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 06/18/2021 1.125% 06/18/2026
3.02 4.11
(66,620.23)(71,997.00) 990,323.00 99.03 SUSQ 1,000,000.00 61761J3R8MORGAN STANLEY CORP NOTES
DTD 07/25/2016 3.125% 07/27/2026
3.37 4.06
Account 73340000 Page 20
Page 52
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDate PriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Corporate Note
(122,399.97)(120,400.00) 1,850,340.00 92.52 RBC 2,000,000.00 02665WDZ1AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 09/09/2021 1.300% 09/09/2026
3.12 4.32
(115,459.52)(113,254.00) 1,854,386.00 92.72 LOOP 2,000,000.00 14913R2Q9CATERPILLAR FINL SERVICE CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 09/14/2021 1.150% 09/14/2026
2.90 4.35
(59,242.75)(64,283.00) 993,257.00 99.33 07/01/26SUSQ 1,000,000.00 46625HRV4JPMORGAN CHASE & CO CORP NOTES
DTD 07/21/2016 2.950% 10/01/2026
3.11 3.97
(99,834.37)(99,352.00) 1,889,368.00 94.47 JPM_CHA 2,000,000.00 24422EWA3JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 01/10/2022 1.700% 01/11/2027
2.95 4.59
(11,433.01)(11,410.76) 342,985.74 96.62 CITIGRP 355,000.00 87612EBM7TARGET CORP CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 01/24/2022 1.950% 01/15/2027
2.71 4.58
(42,011.71)(40,801.60) 1,471,102.40 91.94 02/01/27MORGAN_ 1,600,000.00 438516CE4HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL (CALLABLE)
CORP
DTD 08/16/2021 1.100% 03/01/2027
2.87 4.71
(2,421.16)(2,087.40) 1,947,720.60 92.75 03/02/26GOLDMAN 2,100,000.00 89788MAD4TRUIST FINANCIAL CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/02/2021 1.267% 03/02/2027
2.86 3.83
(2,100,998.91) 2.70 (1,908,645.14) 45,337,066.49 46,850,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.97
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
2,060.21 2,060.21 247,060.21 100.84 NEW ACC 245,000.00 949763S64WELLS FARGO BANK NA
DTD 01/29/2020 1.900% 01/30/2023
0.88 0.82
1,967.84 1,967.84 246,967.84 100.80 NEW ACC 245,000.00 61760A6Q7MORGAN STANLEY PVT BANK
DTD 01/30/2020 1.850% 01/30/2023
0.88 0.83
(7,613.37)(7,613.37) 237,386.63 96.89 NEW ACC 245,000.00 29278TQD5ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
1.82 2.30
(12,344.57)(12,344.57) 232,655.43 94.96 NEW ACC 245,000.00 169894AT9CHIPPEWA VALLEY BANK
DTD 07/29/2020 0.500% 07/29/2025
2.07 3.30
(11,960.41)(11,960.41) 233,039.59 95.12 NEW ACC 245,000.00 58404DHQ7MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
2.07 3.30
(27,890.30) 1.53 (27,890.30) 1,197,109.70 1,225,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.08
Account 73340000 Page 21
Page 53
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDate PriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Asset-Backed Security
(1,701.65)(1,694.45) 178,287.35 99.05 MITSU 180,000.00 58770GAC4MBALT 2021-A A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.250% 01/16/2024
0.78 0.70
(5,745.24)(5,738.12) 274,238.58 97.94 SOCGEN 280,000.00 44891TAD8HALST 2021-A A4
DTD 01/20/2021 0.420% 12/16/2024
1.19 1.10
(11,140.56)(11,119.16) 503,803.08 97.83 RBC 515,000.00 36261RAD0GMALT 2021-1 A4
DTD 02/24/2021 0.330% 02/20/2025
1.09 1.22
(11,617.67)(11,615.11) 518,375.19 97.81 JPM_CHA 530,000.00 43813GAC5HAROT 2021-1 A3
DTD 02/24/2021 0.270% 04/21/2025
1.00 0.98
(13,831.83)(13,819.84) 526,123.35 97.43 BARCLAY 540,000.00 44933LAC7HART 2021-A A3
DTD 04/28/2021 0.380% 09/15/2025
1.14 1.27
(7,310.67)(7,295.62) 367,644.68 98.04 DEUTSCH 375,000.00 36261LAC5GMCAR 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/20/2021 0.350% 10/16/2025
0.91 0.98
(47,273.61)(47,268.13) 877,697.00 94.89 MITSU 925,000.00 50117XAE2KCOT 2021-2A A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.560% 11/17/2025
2.02 2.02
(2,922.71)(2,917.01) 117,059.28 97.55 MITSU 120,000.00 14316NAC3CARMX 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.340% 12/15/2025
1.01 1.00
(23,436.99)(23,423.76) 721,419.19 96.83 MERRILL 745,000.00 43815GAC3HAROT 2021-4 A3
DTD 11/24/2021 0.880% 01/21/2026
1.74 1.92
(18,586.49)(18,552.33) 791,273.12 97.69 MERRILL 810,000.00 14314QAC8CARMX 2021-2 A3
DTD 04/21/2021 0.520% 02/17/2026
1.13 1.11
(45,440.68)(45,405.81) 1,484,342.51 97.02 RBC 1,530,000.00 14317DAC4CARMX 2021-3 A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.550% 06/15/2026
1.28 1.49
(35,199.71)(35,197.06) 989,762.76 96.56 WELLS_F 1,025,000.00 92868KAC7VALET 2021-1 A3
DTD 12/13/2021 1.020% 06/22/2026
1.87 1.90
(18,358.75)(18,358.20) 1,481,584.05 98.77 MERRILL 1,500,000.00 448977AD0HART 2022-A A3
DTD 03/16/2022 2.220% 10/15/2026
2.51 2.21
(15,173.43)(15,171.41) 554,779.06 97.33 BNP_PAR 570,000.00 380146AC4GMCAR 2022-1 A3
DTD 01/19/2022 1.260% 11/16/2026
1.86 2.13
(78,854.76)(78,837.46) 1,785,905.54 95.76 BARCLAY 1,865,000.00 14041NFY2COMET 2021-A3 A3
DTD 11/30/2021 1.040% 11/16/2026
2.00 2.56
(336,413.47) 1.66 (336,594.75) 11,172,294.74 11,510,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 1.78
Account 73340000 Page 22
Page 54
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDate PriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
281,265,000.00 270,881,058.64 (13,723,563.08) (12,123,350.07) 2.35 Managed Account Sub-Total 2.50
Total Investments $271,470,256.40
$589,197.76
$270,881,058.64
Accrued Interest
Securities Sub-Total $281,265,000.00 ($13,723,563.08) ($12,123,350.07) 2.35% 2.50
Account 73340000 Page 23
Page 55
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Transaction Type
Trade CUSIPSecurity DescriptionSettle Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
BUY
03/07/22 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/16/2016 1.625% 05/15/2026
912828R36 (3,504,758.79)(17,722.38)(3,522,481.17) 3,525,000.00 03/03/22
03/07/22 HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL
(CALLABLE) CORP
DTD 08/16/2021 1.100% 03/01/2027
438516CE4 (1,511,904.00)(293.33)(1,512,197.33) 1,600,000.00 03/03/22
03/10/22 ROCHE HOLDINGS INC (CALLABLE)
CORPORATE
DTD 03/10/2022 2.132% 03/10/2025
771196BT8 (3,015,000.00) 0.00 (3,015,000.00) 3,015,000.00 03/03/22
03/16/22 HART 2022-A A3
DTD 03/16/2022 2.220% 10/15/2026
448977AD0 (1,499,942.25) 0.00 (1,499,942.25) 1,500,000.00 03/09/22
03/28/22 TRUIST FINANCIAL CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/02/2021 1.267% 03/02/2027
89788MAD4 (1,949,808.00)(1,921.62)(1,951,729.62) 2,100,000.00 03/24/22
(19,937.33) (11,501,350.37)(11,481,413.04) 11,740,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
INTEREST
03/01/22 LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 02/20/2015 2.900% 03/01/2025
539830BE8 0.00 23,200.00 23,200.00 1,600,000.00 03/01/22
03/08/22 FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 09/04/2020 0.250% 09/08/2023
3137EAEW5 0.00 6,000.00 6,000.00 4,800,000.00 03/08/22
03/09/22 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE
CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 09/09/2021 1.300% 09/09/2026
02665WDZ1 0.00 13,000.00 13,000.00 2,000,000.00 03/09/22
03/14/22 INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
NOTES
DTD 01/16/2020 1.750% 03/14/2025
4581X0DK1 0.00 13,125.00 13,125.00 1,500,000.00 03/14/22
03/14/22 CATERPILLAR FINL SERVICE
CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 09/14/2021 1.150% 09/14/2026
14913R2Q9 0.00 11,500.00 11,500.00 2,000,000.00 03/14/22
03/15/22 CARMX 2021-3 A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.550% 06/15/2026
14317DAC4 0.00 701.25 701.25 1,530,000.00 03/15/22
03/15/22 HALST 2021-A A4
DTD 01/20/2021 0.420% 12/16/2024
44891TAD8 0.00 98.00 98.00 280,000.00 03/15/22
Account 73340000 Page 24
Page 56
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Transaction Type
Trade CUSIPSecurity DescriptionSettle Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
INTEREST
03/15/22 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 09/15/2021 0.375% 09/15/2024
91282CCX7 0.00 2,625.00 2,625.00 1,400,000.00 03/15/22
03/15/22 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/15/2020 0.500% 03/15/2023
912828ZD5 0.00 12,500.00 12,500.00 5,000,000.00 03/15/22
03/15/22 MBALT 2021-A A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.250% 01/16/2024
58770GAC4 0.00 37.50 37.50 180,000.00 03/15/22
03/15/22 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 09/15/2020 0.125% 09/15/2023
91282CAK7 0.00 3,125.00 3,125.00 5,000,000.00 03/15/22
03/15/22 CARMX 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.340% 12/15/2025
14316NAC3 0.00 34.00 34.00 120,000.00 03/15/22
03/15/22 HART 2021-A A3
DTD 04/28/2021 0.380% 09/15/2025
44933LAC7 0.00 171.00 171.00 540,000.00 03/15/22
03/15/22 KCOT 2021-2A A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.560% 11/17/2025
50117XAE2 0.00 431.67 431.67 925,000.00 03/15/22
03/15/22 CARMX 2021-2 A3
DTD 04/21/2021 0.520% 02/17/2026
14314QAC8 0.00 351.00 351.00 810,000.00 03/15/22
03/15/22 COMET 2021-A3 A3
DTD 11/30/2021 1.040% 11/16/2026
14041NFY2 0.00 1,616.33 1,616.33 1,865,000.00 03/15/22
03/16/22 GMCAR 2022-1 A3
DTD 01/19/2022 1.260% 11/16/2026
380146AC4 0.00 598.50 598.50 570,000.00 03/16/22
03/16/22 GMCAR 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/20/2021 0.350% 10/16/2025
36261LAC5 0.00 109.38 109.38 375,000.00 03/16/22
03/18/22 CHARLES SCHWAB CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/18/2021 0.750% 03/18/2024
808513BN4 0.00 2,475.00 2,475.00 660,000.00 03/18/22
03/20/22 GMALT 2021-1 A4
DTD 02/24/2021 0.330% 02/20/2025
36261RAD0 0.00 141.63 141.63 515,000.00 03/20/22
03/20/22 VALET 2021-1 A3
DTD 12/13/2021 1.020% 06/22/2026
92868KAC7 0.00 871.25 871.25 1,025,000.00 03/20/22
03/21/22 HAROT 2021-4 A3
DTD 11/24/2021 0.880% 01/21/2026
43815GAC3 0.00 546.33 546.33 745,000.00 03/21/22
03/21/22 HAROT 2021-1 A3
DTD 02/24/2021 0.270% 04/21/2025
43813GAC5 0.00 119.25 119.25 530,000.00 03/21/22
Account 73340000 Page 25
Page 57
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Transaction Type
Trade CUSIPSecurity DescriptionSettle Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
INTEREST
03/23/22 FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 09/25/2020 0.375% 09/23/2025
3137EAEX3 0.00 4,312.50 4,312.50 2,300,000.00 03/23/22
03/23/22 INTER-AMERICAN DEVEL BK NOTES
DTD 09/23/2021 0.500% 09/23/2024
4581X0DZ8 0.00 9,387.50 9,387.50 3,755,000.00 03/23/22
03/24/22 ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
29278TQD5 0.00 84.58 84.58 245,000.00 03/24/22
03/29/22 WELLS FARGO BANK NA
DTD 01/29/2020 1.900% 01/30/2023
949763S64 0.00 369.85 369.85 245,000.00 03/29/22
03/29/22 CHIPPEWA VALLEY BANK
DTD 07/29/2020 0.500% 07/29/2025
169894AT9 0.00 97.33 97.33 245,000.00 03/29/22
03/30/22 MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
58404DHQ7 0.00 110.75 110.75 245,000.00 03/30/22
03/31/22 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 03/31/2021 0.750% 03/31/2026
91282CBT7 0.00 11,250.00 11,250.00 3,000,000.00 03/31/22
03/31/22 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/31/2020 0.500% 03/31/2025
912828ZF0 0.00 6,875.00 6,875.00 2,750,000.00 03/31/22
03/31/22 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 09/30/2021 0.250% 09/30/2023
91282CDA6 0.00 2,500.00 2,500.00 2,000,000.00 03/31/22
03/31/22 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/02/2017 2.125% 09/30/2024
9128282Y5 0.00 59,978.13 59,978.13 5,645,000.00 03/31/22
188,342.73 188,342.73 0.00 54,400,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
SELL
03/07/22 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 12/31/2015 2.125% 12/31/2022
912828N30 5,044,726.56 19,371.55 5,064,098.11 (160,351.57)(35,219.15)FIFO 5,000,000.00 03/03/22
03/07/22 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2018 2.375% 01/31/2023
9128283U2 1,011,679.69 2,296.27 1,013,975.96 (36,250.00)(8,042.00)FIFO 1,000,000.00 03/03/22
03/07/22 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/15/2012 1.625% 11/15/2022
912828TY6 2,040,467.19 10,206.08 2,050,673.27 (49,957.02)(10,191.36)FIFO 2,030,000.00 03/03/22
03/16/22 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/29/2016 1.500% 02/28/2023
912828P79 1,504,335.94 978.26 1,505,314.20 (38,554.68)(15,282.44)FIFO 1,500,000.00 03/09/22
03/28/22 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/29/2016 1.500% 02/28/2023
912828P79 1,249,804.69 1,426.63 1,251,231.32 (35,937.50)(15,981.83)FIFO 1,250,000.00 03/24/22
Account 73340000 Page 26
Page 58
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Transaction Type
Trade CUSIPSecurity DescriptionSettle Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
34,278.79 (84,716.78)(321,050.77) 10,885,292.86 10,851,014.07 10,780,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
(630,398.97) 202,684.19 (427,714.78) (321,050.77) (84,716.78)Managed Account Sub-Total
Total Security Transactions ($321,050.77)($427,714.78)$202,684.19 ($630,398.97)($84,716.78)
Account 73340000 Page 27
Page 59
Trustee and/orPurchase Maturity CostBond Issue/DescriptionPaying AgentAccount NameTrust Account #FundInvestmentDateDate*YieldValueCFD 2003-01 Improvement Area 1 (2013) Wells Fargo Reserve Fund 46571801 865 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 1,417,010.87$ Agency Project 46571807 614 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 77,816.29$ Cultural Center Fund 46571808 615 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 191,855.33$ Bond Fund 46571800 864 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 71.86$ Developer Project 46571806 614 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 98,098.28$ Special Tax 46571805 864 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 0.55$ 1,784,853.18$ CFD 2003-01 Improvement Area 2 (2013) Wells Fargo Bond Fund 46659800 866 Money Market Fund 12/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 6.77$ Reserve Fund 46659801 867 Money Market Fund 12/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 132,474.72$ Special Tax Fund 46659805 866 Money Market Fund 12/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 0.09$ 132,481.58$ 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% 60.73Reserve Fund 48436801 821 Money Market Fund N/A 0.01% 1,187,375.11Special Tax Fund 48436807 820 Money Market Fund N/A 1.05Project Fund 48436809 617 Money Market Fund N/A 44,983.551,232,420.44$ 2014 Rancho Summit Wells Fargo Cost of Issuance Fund 48709906 Money Market Fund N/A -$ Bond Fund 48709900 858 Money Market Fund N/A 1,289.80 Reserve Fund 48709901 859 Money Market Fund N/A 259,478.99 Sepcial Tax Fund 48709907 858 Money Market Fund N/A 0.20 Rebate Fund 48709908 Money Market Fund N/A - Redemption Fund 48709903 Money Market Fund N/A - Prepayment Fund 48709904 Money Market Fund N/A - 260,768.99$ 2019 Lease Revenue Bonds Wells Fargo Bond Fund 82631600 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A 1.16$ Interest 82631601 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A - 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 7,102,002.71 Acquisition and Construciton - Series B 82631606 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A 2,294,370.35 Cost of Issuance 82631607 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A - 9,396,375.93$ CFD No. 2000-01 South Etiwanda Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2000-1 AGY 6712140200 7/30/2015 N/A -$ Special Tax Fund 6712140201 852 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.05 Bond Fund 6712140202 852 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.06 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% 22,750.09 22,750.20$ City of Rancho Cucamonga Summary of Cash and Investments with Fiscal AgentsFor the Month Ended3/31/2022I:\FINANCE\SALINA\Fiscal Agent Stmts\FY 2021-22\03-2022\March 2022 Fiscal Agent Statements Workbook.xlsx Summary ReportPage 1 Page 60
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 Ended3/31/2022CFD 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 856 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.51$ Bond Fund 6712140302 856 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.46$ 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% 208,900.82 208,901.79$ 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 860 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.51 Bond Fund 6712140402 860 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.98 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% 303,539.44 303,540.93$ 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 862 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.11 Bond Fund 6712140502 862 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.03 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% 29,470.37 29,470.51$ 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 869 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 6.15 Bond Fund 6712140602 869 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.11 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% 130,467.31 130,473.57$ 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 871 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 3.70 Bond Fund 6712140702 871 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.08 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% 78,281.91 78,285.69$ 13,580,322.81 TOTAL CASH AND INVESTMENTS WITH FISCAL AGENTS13,580,322.81$ * Note: These investments are money market accounts which have no stated maturity date as they may be liquidated upon demand.I:\FINANCE\SALINA\Fiscal Agent Stmts\FY 2021-22\03-2022\March 2022 Fiscal Agent Statements Workbook.xlsx Summary ReportPage 2 Page 61
Page 62
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022
Account Statement
Consolidated Summary Statement
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Investment Allocation
Investment Type Closing Market Value Percent
553,035.72 0.71 Asset-Backed Security
3,706,587.31 4.75 Corporate Note
470,426.22 0.60 Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
2,628,058.14 3.37 Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
29,229,738.88 37.44 U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
40,852,008.86 52.31 Local Agency Investment Fund
638,779.40 0.82 Passbook/Checking Accounts
$78,078,634.53 Total 100.00%
Portfolio Summary
and Income
Closing
Market ValuePortfolio Holdings
Cash Dividends
PFMAM Managed Account (27,501.43) 36,587,846.27
Local Agency Investment Fund 0.00 40,852,008.86
Passbook/Checking Accounts 0.00 638,779.40
($27,501.43)$78,078,634.53 Total
Maturity Distribution (Fixed Income Holdings)
Portfolio Holdings Closing Market Value Percent
41,490,788.26
0.00
0.00
0.00
833,306.21
13,756,664.85
7,221,902.92
7,158,198.85
7,617,773.44
0.00
53.13
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.07
17.62
9.25
9.17
9.76
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 $78,078,634.53
456
100.00%
Weighted Average Days to Maturity
Sector Allocation
0.71%
ABS
4.75%
Corporate Note
0.60%
Cert of Deposit -
FDIC
3.37%
Supra-National
Agency Bond / Note
37.44%
US TSY Bond / Note
52.31%
Local Agency
Investment Fund
0.82%
Passbook/Checking
Accounts
Summary Page 1
Page 63
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Summary Statement
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST -
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)
$37,094,092.96
0.00
(1,629,447.66)
1,806,544.42
0.00
(683,343.45)
$36,587,846.27
5,492.96
(4,442.25)
(28,552.14)
($27,501.43)
Total
38,063,877.11
123,040.85
1,630,298.21
0.00
4,642.41
(1,810,986.67)
(37,926,702.24)
(89,803.93)
Total Accrual Basis Earnings ($5,634.26)
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
1,630,298.21
4,642.41
0.00
(1,810,986.67)
0.00
0.00
Cash Balance
$6,162.45 Closing Cash Balance
Account 73340100 Page 1
Page 64
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Portfolio Summary and Statistics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST -
Account Summary
Percent Par Value Market ValueDescription
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note 30,205,000.00 29,229,738.88 79.89
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note 2,810,000.00 2,628,058.14 7.18
Corporate Note 3,840,000.00 3,706,587.31 10.13
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured 490,000.00 470,426.22 1.29
Asset-Backed Security 570,000.00 553,035.72 1.51
Managed Account Sub-Total 37,915,000.00 36,587,846.27 100.00%
Accrued Interest 123,040.85
Total Portfolio 37,915,000.00 36,710,887.12
Unsettled Trades 0.00 0.00
Sector Allocation
1.51%
ABS
1.29%
Cert of Deposit -
FDIC
10.13%
Corporate Note
7.18%
Supra-National
Agency Bond / Note
79.89%
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
0.00%
2.28%
37.60%
19.74%19.56%20.82%
0.00%
Maturity Distribution Characteristics
Yield to Maturity at Cost
Yield to Maturity at Market
Weighted Average Days to Maturity 973
0.79%
2.36%
Account 73340100 Page 2
Page 65
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Issuer Summary
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST -
Credit Quality (S&P Ratings)
2.30%
A
0.28%
A+
3.72%
A-
1.70%
AA
79.89%
AA+
8.51%
AAA
2.13%
BBB+
1.47%
NR
Issuer Summary
Percentof HoldingsIssuer
Market Value
351,413.63 0.96 AMAZON.COM INC
273,812.00 0.75 AMERICAN EXPRESS CO
185,034.00 0.51 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE
139,704.45 0.38 ASTRAZENECA PLC
166,852.29 0.46 BANK OF AMERICA CO
268,918.93 0.73 BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC
172,366.22 0.47 CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORP
170,262.48 0.47 CITIGROUP INC
188,936.80 0.52 DEERE & COMPANY
237,386.63 0.65 ENERBANK USA
58,397.80 0.16 GM FINANCIAL CONSUMER AUTOMOBILE TRUST
167,403.56 0.46 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC
67,784.35 0.19 HONDA AUTO RECEIVABLES
257,442.92 0.70 HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL
153,097.02 0.42 HYUNDAI AUTO RECEIVABLES
272,060.55 0.74 IBM CORP
347,533.29 0.95 INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
2,280,524.85 6.22 INTL BANK OF RECONSTRUCTION AND DEV
342,984.86 0.94 JP MORGAN CHASE & CO
233,039.59 0.64 MEDALLION BANK UTAH
167,942.28 0.46 MORGAN STANLEY
33,876.12 0.09 STATE STREET CORPORATION
178,739.05 0.49 TARGET CORP
184,331.60 0.50 THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORPORATION
101,813.14 0.28 TOYOTA MOTOR CORP
255,058.65 0.70 TRUIST FIN CORP
29,229,738.88 79.88 UNITED STATES TREASURY
101,390.33 0.28 VOLKSWAGEN OF AMERICA
$36,587,846.27 Total 100.00%
Account 73340100 Page 3
Page 66
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST -
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 MarketTrade Settle
Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2020 0.125% 11/30/2022
833,306.21 840,072.09 351.92 840,164.06 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 840,000.00 91282CAX9 0.11
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2016 1.625% 05/31/2023
1,494,843.75 1,516,829.87 8,169.64 1,520,156.25 01/07/2201/06/22AaaAA+ 1,500,000.00 912828R69 0.66
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2018 2.750% 05/31/2023
2,317,232.81 2,364,151.27 21,153.09 2,414,591.02 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 2,295,000.00 9128284S6 0.16
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 06/30/2016 1.375% 06/30/2023
789,037.50 800,695.34 2,747.91 801,521.48 01/25/2201/24/22AaaAA+ 795,000.00 912828S35 0.80
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.125% 07/31/2023
974,687.50 998,894.12 207.18 998,359.38 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
773,261.68 794,072.46 86.41 793,695.70 09/03/2109/02/21AaaAA+ 795,000.00 91282CCU3 0.21
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 0.375% 10/31/2023
772,889.06 793,222.32 1,251.80 792,764.06 11/03/2111/01/21AaaAA+ 795,000.00 91282CDD0 0.52
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2018 2.875% 11/30/2023
2,283,306.25 2,359,573.56 21,777.34 2,410,342.97 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 2,260,000.00 9128285P1 0.22
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 12/31/2021 0.750% 12/31/2023
1,948,125.00 1,995,511.87 3,770.72 1,994,921.88 01/07/2201/06/22AaaAA+ 2,000,000.00 91282CDR9 0.88
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/15/2021 0.125% 01/15/2024
962,343.80 991,279.05 262.43 989,492.19 11/18/2111/17/21AaaAA+ 1,000,000.00 91282CBE0 0.62
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/15/2021 0.250% 03/15/2024
1,440,937.50 1,479,763.57 173.23 1,477,382.81 01/07/2201/06/22AaaAA+ 1,500,000.00 91282CBR1 0.95
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/15/2021 0.250% 05/15/2024
1,887,667.87 1,972,299.81 1,868.61 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
324,275.00 339,227.40 249.86 338,990.63 07/28/2107/26/21AaaAA+ 340,000.00 91282CCG4 0.35
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/15/2021 0.375% 07/15/2024
281,540.63 292,407.87 232.25 291,992.38 11/18/2111/17/21AaaAA+ 295,000.00 91282CCL3 0.76
Account 73340100 Page 4
Page 67
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST -
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 MarketTrade Settle
Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/15/2021 0.375% 07/15/2024
1,431,562.50 1,477,531.08 1,180.94 1,475,273.44 01/07/2201/06/22AaaAA+ 1,500,000.00 91282CCL3 1.04
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2019 1.500% 11/30/2024
1,948,125.00 2,056,003.58 10,054.95 2,073,828.13 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 2,000,000.00 912828YV6 0.44
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 12/31/2019 1.750% 12/31/2024
490,000.00 509,769.48 2,199.59 510,605.47 01/05/2201/03/22AaaAA+ 500,000.00 912828YY0 1.03
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2020 0.250% 05/31/2025
1,433,643.75 1,524,583.42 1,290.38 1,520,449.22 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 1,540,000.00 912828ZT0 0.57
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 08/31/2020 0.250% 08/31/2025
2,313,281.25 2,411,979.17 543.48 2,406,054.69 01/07/2201/06/22AaaAA+ 2,500,000.00 91282CAJ0 1.31
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
460,703.10 493,834.35 310.77 492,910.16 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
651,984.34 698,890.29 2,204.42 698,660.16 05/27/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 700,000.00 91282CBW0 0.79
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/16/2016 1.625% 05/15/2026
578,906.28 596,610.99 3,689.92 596,554.69 03/07/2203/03/22AaaAA+ 600,000.00 912828R36 1.77
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2019 2.125% 05/31/2026
984,375.00 1,058,372.30 7,122.25 1,067,851.56 07/28/2107/26/21AaaAA+ 1,000,000.00 9128286X3 0.70
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 06/30/2021 0.875% 06/30/2026
560,343.72 586,215.31 1,319.75 585,468.75 01/07/2201/06/22AaaAA+ 600,000.00 91282CCJ8 1.44
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 1.125% 10/31/2026
352,734.38 373,439.66 1,771.41 373,300.78 11/03/2111/01/21AaaAA+ 375,000.00 91282CDG3 1.22
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 1.125% 10/31/2026
940,625.00 994,394.05 4,723.76 993,945.31 11/18/2111/17/21AaaAA+ 1,000,000.00 91282CDG3 1.25
98,714.01 29,229,738.88 30,319,624.28 0.67 30,430,496.90 30,205,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
INTER-AMERICAN DEVEL BK NOTES
DTD 09/23/2021 0.500% 09/23/2024
347,533.29 364,776.72 40.56 364,729.90 09/23/2109/15/21AaaAAA 365,000.00 4581X0DZ8 0.52
Account 73340100 Page 5
Page 68
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST -
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 MarketTrade Settle
Par
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
INTL BK RECON & DEVELOP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 02/10/2021 0.650% 02/10/2026
2,280,524.85 2,426,938.67 2,251.44 2,422,970.55 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAAA 2,445,000.00 459058JS3 0.85
2,292.00 2,628,058.14 2,791,715.39 0.80 2,787,700.45 2,810,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Corporate Note
AMERICAN EXPRESS CO CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE
DTD 07/30/2019 2.500% 07/30/2024
273,812.00 283,508.15 1,164.93 284,845.00 11/23/2111/19/21A2BBB+ 275,000.00 025816CG2 1.14
MORGAN STANLEY CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 01/27/2016 3.875% 01/27/2026
167,942.28 181,405.58 1,136.67 185,034.30 05/27/2105/25/21A1BBB+ 165,000.00 61746BDZ6 1.19
STATE STREET CORP CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 02/07/2022 1.746% 02/06/2026
33,876.12 35,000.00 91.67 35,000.00 02/07/2202/02/22A1A 35,000.00 857477BR3 1.75
GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORP NOTES
(CALL
DTD 02/25/2016 3.750% 02/25/2026
167,403.56 180,078.14 618.75 183,570.75 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
342,984.86 367,407.92 5,610.00 373,585.20 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
166,852.29 179,808.61 2,598.75 182,902.50 05/27/2105/25/21A2A- 165,000.00 06051GFX2 1.21
CITIGROUP CORP NOTES
DTD 05/02/2016 3.400% 05/01/2026
170,262.48 184,176.01 2,408.33 187,113.90 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
351,413.63 375,295.47 1,447.92 375,356.25 05/27/2105/25/21A1AA 375,000.00 023135BX3 0.98
IBM CORP
DTD 05/15/2019 3.300% 05/15/2026
151,530.30 163,348.87 1,870.00 165,211.50 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
139,704.45 150,713.77 615.00 150,814.50 09/03/2109/01/21A3A- 150,000.00 04636NAA1 1.08
Account 73340100 Page 6
Page 69
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST -
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 MarketTrade Settle
Par
Corporate Note
TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 06/18/2021 1.125% 06/18/2026
101,813.14 109,783.89 354.06 109,755.80 09/13/2109/08/21A1A+ 110,000.00 89236TJK2 1.17
AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 09/09/2021 1.300% 09/09/2026
185,034.00 197,274.00 158.89 197,074.00 12/03/2112/01/21A3A- 200,000.00 02665WDZ1 1.62
BANK OF NY MELLON CORP CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 07/27/2021 1.050% 10/15/2026
184,331.60 195,640.87 968.33 195,328.00 12/03/2112/01/21A1A 200,000.00 06406RAV9 1.55
JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 01/10/2022 1.700% 01/11/2027
188,936.80 198,920.24 765.00 198,872.00 01/13/2201/11/22A2A 200,000.00 24422EWA3 1.82
TARGET CORP CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 01/24/2022 1.950% 01/15/2027
33,815.50 34,942.69 127.02 34,940.50 01/24/2201/19/22A2A 35,000.00 87612EBM7 1.99
TARGET CORP CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 01/24/2022 1.950% 01/15/2027
144,923.55 145,052.31 544.38 145,041.00 03/28/2203/24/22A2A 150,000.00 87612EBM7 2.69
IBM CORP CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 02/09/2022 2.200% 02/09/2027
120,530.25 120,843.12 397.22 120,833.75 03/28/2203/24/22A3A- 125,000.00 459200KM2 2.94
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL (CALLABLE)
CORP
DTD 08/16/2021 1.100% 03/01/2027
257,442.92 264,794.97 256.67 264,583.20 03/07/2203/03/22A2A 280,000.00 438516CE4 2.27
TRUIST FINANCIAL CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/02/2021 1.267% 03/02/2027
255,058.65 255,375.71 280.68 255,332.00 03/28/2203/24/22A3A- 275,000.00 89788MAD4 2.83
BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/15/2022 2.300% 03/15/2027
268,918.93 269,218.53 281.11 269,205.75 03/28/2203/24/22Aa2AA 275,000.00 084664CZ2 2.76
21,695.38 3,706,587.31 3,892,588.85 1.67 3,914,399.90 3,840,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
Account 73340100 Page 7
Page 70
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST -
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 MarketTrade Settle
Par
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
237,386.63 245,000.00 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
233,039.59 245,000.00 7.38 245,000.00 07/30/2007/30/20NRNR 245,000.00 58404DHQ7 0.55
31.54 470,426.22 490,000.00 0.50 490,000.00 490,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Asset-Backed Security
HAROT 2021-4 A3
DTD 11/24/2021 0.880% 01/21/2026
67,784.35 69,986.48 17.11 69,985.24 11/24/2111/16/21AaaNR 70,000.00 43815GAC3 0.89
VALET 2021-1 A3
DTD 12/13/2021 1.020% 06/22/2026
101,390.33 104,996.15 32.73 104,995.88 12/13/2112/07/21AaaAAA 105,000.00 92868KAC7 1.02
HART 2022-A A3
DTD 03/16/2022 2.220% 10/15/2026
153,097.02 154,994.09 143.38 154,994.03 03/16/2203/09/22NRAAA 155,000.00 448977AD0 2.22
GMCAR 2022-1 A3
DTD 01/19/2022 1.260% 11/16/2026
58,397.80 59,995.00 31.50 59,994.79 01/19/2201/11/22NRAAA 60,000.00 380146AC4 1.26
COMET 2021-A3 A3
DTD 11/30/2021 1.040% 11/16/2026
172,366.22 179,976.87 83.20 179,975.20 11/30/2111/18/21NRAAA 180,000.00 14041NFY2 1.04
307.92 553,035.72 569,948.59 1.37 569,945.14 570,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
37,915,000.00 38,192,542.39 0.79 123,040.85 38,063,877.11 36,587,846.27 Managed Account Sub-Total
$37,915,000.00 $38,192,542.39 $123,040.85 $38,063,877.11 $36,587,846.27 0.79%
$36,710,887.12
$123,040.85
Total Investments
Accrued Interest
Securities Sub-Total
Account 73340100 Page 8
Page 71
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST -
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDate PriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
(6,765.88)(6,857.85) 833,306.21 99.20 HSBC 840,000.00 91282CAX9US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2020 0.125% 11/30/2022
1.33 0.67
(21,986.12)(25,312.50) 1,494,843.75 99.66 CITIGRP 1,500,000.00 912828R69US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2016 1.625% 05/31/2023
1.92 1.16
(46,918.46)(97,358.21) 2,317,232.81 100.97 HSBC 2,295,000.00 9128284S6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2018 2.750% 05/31/2023
1.91 1.15
(11,657.84)(12,483.98) 789,037.50 99.25 NOMURA 795,000.00 912828S35US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 06/30/2016 1.375% 06/30/2023
1.98 1.24
(24,206.62)(23,671.88) 974,687.50 97.47 MERRILL 1,000,000.00 91282CCN9US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.125% 07/31/2023
2.05 1.34
(20,810.78)(20,434.02) 773,261.68 97.27 CITIGRP 795,000.00 91282CCU3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 08/31/2021 0.125% 08/31/2023
2.10 1.41
(20,333.26)(19,875.00) 772,889.06 97.22 CITIGRP 795,000.00 91282CDD0US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 0.375% 10/31/2023
2.17 1.58
(76,267.31)(127,036.72) 2,283,306.25 101.03 CITIGRP 2,260,000.00 9128285P1US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2018 2.875% 11/30/2023
2.24 1.63
(47,386.87)(46,796.88) 1,948,125.00 97.41 CITIGRP 2,000,000.00 91282CDR9US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 12/31/2021 0.750% 12/31/2023
2.27 1.74
(28,935.25)(27,148.39) 962,343.80 96.23 JPM_CHA 1,000,000.00 91282CBE0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/15/2021 0.125% 01/15/2024
2.28 1.79
(38,826.07)(36,445.31) 1,440,937.50 96.06 WELLS_F 1,500,000.00 91282CBR1US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/15/2021 0.250% 03/15/2024
2.32 1.95
(84,631.94)(83,551.86) 1,887,667.87 95.58 BARCLAY 1,975,000.00 91282CCC3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/15/2021 0.250% 05/15/2024
2.40 2.12
(14,952.40)(14,715.63) 324,275.00 95.38 MERRILL 340,000.00 91282CCG4US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 06/15/2021 0.250% 06/15/2024
2.41 2.20
(10,867.24)(10,451.75) 281,540.63 95.44 JPM_CHA 295,000.00 91282CCL3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/15/2021 0.375% 07/15/2024
2.43 2.28
(45,968.58)(43,710.94) 1,431,562.50 95.44 WELLS_F 1,500,000.00 91282CCL3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/15/2021 0.375% 07/15/2024
2.43 2.28
(107,878.58)(125,703.13) 1,948,125.00 97.41 GOLDMAN 2,000,000.00 912828YV6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2019 1.500% 11/30/2024
2.51 2.61
(19,769.48)(20,605.47) 490,000.00 98.00 MORGAN_ 500,000.00 912828YY0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 12/31/2019 1.750% 12/31/2024
2.51 2.69
Account 73340100 Page 9
Page 72
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST -
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDate PriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
(90,939.67)(86,805.47) 1,433,643.75 93.09 WELLS_F 1,540,000.00 912828ZT0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2020 0.250% 05/31/2025
2.53 3.15
(98,697.92)(92,773.44) 2,313,281.25 92.53 MORGAN_ 2,500,000.00 91282CAJ0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 08/31/2020 0.250% 08/31/2025
2.55 3.40
(33,131.25)(32,207.06) 460,703.10 92.14 NOMURA 500,000.00 91282CBH3US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
2.54 3.81
(46,905.95)(46,675.82) 651,984.34 93.14 BNP_PAR 700,000.00 91282CBW0US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 04/30/2021 0.750% 04/30/2026
2.53 4.01
(17,704.71)(17,648.41) 578,906.28 96.48 CITIGRP 600,000.00 912828R36US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/16/2016 1.625% 05/15/2026
2.53 3.98
(73,997.30)(83,476.56) 984,375.00 98.44 CITIGRP 1,000,000.00 9128286X3US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2019 2.125% 05/31/2026
2.52 3.98
(25,871.59)(25,125.03) 560,343.72 93.39 WELLS_F 600,000.00 91282CCJ8US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 06/30/2021 0.875% 06/30/2026
2.52 4.17
(20,705.28)(20,566.40) 352,734.38 94.06 MORGAN_ 375,000.00 91282CDG3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 1.125% 10/31/2026
2.50 4.45
(53,769.05)(53,320.31) 940,625.00 94.06 CITIGRP 1,000,000.00 91282CDG3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 1.125% 10/31/2026
2.50 4.45
(1,200,758.02) 2.29 (1,089,885.40) 29,229,738.88 30,205,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.30
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
(17,243.43)(17,196.61) 347,533.29 95.21 JPM_CHA 365,000.00 4581X0DZ8INTER-AMERICAN DEVEL BK NOTES
DTD 09/23/2021 0.500% 09/23/2024
2.50 2.47
(146,413.82)(142,445.70) 2,280,524.85 93.27 05/10/22KEYBANC 2,445,000.00 459058JS3INTL BK RECON & DEVELOP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 02/10/2021 0.650% 02/10/2026
2.49 0.14
(159,642.31) 2.49 (163,657.25) 2,628,058.14 2,810,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 0.45
Corporate Note
(9,696.15)(11,033.00) 273,812.00 99.57 06/30/24MORGAN_ 275,000.00 025816CG2AMERICAN EXPRESS CO CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE
DTD 07/30/2019 2.500% 07/30/2024
2.69 2.19
Account 73340100 Page 10
Page 73
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST -
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDate PriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Corporate Note
(13,463.30)(17,092.02) 167,942.28 101.78 BNP_PAR 165,000.00 61746BDZ6MORGAN STANLEY CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 01/27/2016 3.875% 01/27/2026
3.37 3.57
(1,123.88)(1,123.88) 33,876.12 96.79 GOLDMAN 35,000.00 857477BR3STATE STREET CORP CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 02/07/2022 1.746% 02/06/2026
2.63 3.73
(12,674.58)(16,167.19) 167,403.56 101.46 11/25/25JPM_CHA 165,000.00 38143U8H7GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORP NOTES
(CALL
DTD 02/25/2016 3.750% 02/25/2026
3.35 3.44
(24,423.06)(30,600.34) 342,984.86 100.88 01/01/26JSEB 340,000.00 46625HQW3JP MORGAN CORP (CALLABLE) NOTES
DTD 03/23/2016 3.300% 04/01/2026
3.07 3.50
(12,956.32)(16,050.21) 166,852.29 101.12 FIFTH_3 165,000.00 06051GFX2BANK OF AMERICA CORP NOTES
DTD 04/19/2016 3.500% 04/19/2026
3.20 3.76
(13,913.53)(16,851.42) 170,262.48 100.15 JPM_CHA 170,000.00 172967KN0CITIGROUP CORP NOTES
DTD 05/02/2016 3.400% 05/01/2026
3.36 3.80
(23,881.84)(23,942.62) 351,413.63 93.71 UBS 375,000.00 023135BX3AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/12/2021 1.000% 05/12/2026
2.62 4.02
(11,818.57)(13,681.20) 151,530.30 101.02 MORGAN_ 150,000.00 459200JZ5IBM CORP
DTD 05/15/2019 3.300% 05/15/2026
3.03 3.85
(11,009.32)(11,110.05) 139,704.45 93.14 04/28/26MORGAN_ 150,000.00 04636NAA1ASTRAZENECA FINANCE LLC (CALLABLE)
CORP
DTD 05/28/2021 1.200% 05/28/2026
2.97 3.97
(7,970.75)(7,942.66) 101,813.14 92.56 JPM_CHA 110,000.00 89236TJK2TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP
CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 06/18/2021 1.125% 06/18/2026
3.02 4.11
(12,240.00)(12,040.00) 185,034.00 92.52 RBC 200,000.00 02665WDZ1AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 09/09/2021 1.300% 09/09/2026
3.12 4.32
(11,309.27)(10,996.40) 184,331.60 92.17 DEUTSCH 200,000.00 06406RAV9BANK OF NY MELLON CORP CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 07/27/2021 1.050% 10/15/2026
2.90 4.42
(9,983.44)(9,935.20) 188,936.80 94.47 JPM_CHA 200,000.00 24422EWA3JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 01/10/2022 1.700% 01/11/2027
2.95 4.59
(1,127.19)(1,125.00) 33,815.50 96.62 CITIGRP 35,000.00 87612EBM7TARGET CORP CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 01/24/2022 1.950% 01/15/2027
2.71 4.58
Account 73340100 Page 11
Page 74
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST -
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDate PriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Corporate Note
(128.76)(117.45) 144,923.55 96.62 STIFEL 150,000.00 87612EBM7TARGET CORP CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 01/24/2022 1.950% 01/15/2027
2.71 4.58
(312.87)(303.50) 120,530.25 96.42 DEUTSCH 125,000.00 459200KM2IBM CORP CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 02/09/2022 2.200% 02/09/2027
3.00 4.62
(7,352.05)(7,140.28) 257,442.92 91.94 02/01/27MORGAN_ 280,000.00 438516CE4HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL (CALLABLE)
CORP
DTD 08/16/2021 1.100% 03/01/2027
2.87 4.71
(317.06)(273.35) 255,058.65 92.75 03/02/26GOLDMAN 275,000.00 89788MAD4TRUIST FINANCIAL CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/02/2021 1.267% 03/02/2027
2.86 3.83
(299.60)(286.82) 268,918.93 97.79 02/15/27CITIGRP 275,000.00 084664CZ2BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/15/2022 2.300% 03/15/2027
2.78 4.63
(207,812.59) 2.95 (186,001.54) 3,706,587.31 3,840,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 3.95
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
(7,613.37)(7,613.37) 237,386.63 96.89 NEW ACC 245,000.00 29278TQD5ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
1.82 2.30
(11,960.41)(11,960.41) 233,039.59 95.12 NEW ACC 245,000.00 58404DHQ7MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
2.07 3.30
(19,573.78) 1.94 (19,573.78) 470,426.22 490,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.80
Asset-Backed Security
(2,202.13)(2,200.89) 67,784.35 96.83 MERRILL 70,000.00 43815GAC3HAROT 2021-4 A3
DTD 11/24/2021 0.880% 01/21/2026
1.74 1.92
(3,605.82)(3,605.55) 101,390.33 96.56 WELLS_F 105,000.00 92868KAC7VALET 2021-1 A3
DTD 12/13/2021 1.020% 06/22/2026
1.87 1.90
(1,897.07)(1,897.01) 153,097.02 98.77 MERRILL 155,000.00 448977AD0HART 2022-A A3
DTD 03/16/2022 2.220% 10/15/2026
2.51 2.21
(1,597.20)(1,596.99) 58,397.80 97.33 BNP_PAR 60,000.00 380146AC4GMCAR 2022-1 A3
DTD 01/19/2022 1.260% 11/16/2026
1.86 2.13
Account 73340100 Page 12
Page 75
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST -
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDate PriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Asset-Backed Security
(7,610.65)(7,608.98) 172,366.22 95.76 BARCLAY 180,000.00 14041NFY2COMET 2021-A3 A3
DTD 11/30/2021 1.040% 11/16/2026
2.00 2.56
(16,909.42) 2.07 (16,912.87) 553,035.72 570,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.22
37,915,000.00 36,587,846.27 (1,604,696.12) (1,476,030.84) 2.36 Managed Account Sub-Total 2.34
Total Investments $36,710,887.12
$123,040.85
$36,587,846.27
Accrued Interest
Securities Sub-Total $37,915,000.00 ($1,604,696.12) ($1,476,030.84) 2.36% 2.34
Account 73340100 Page 13
Page 76
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST -
Transaction Type
Trade CUSIPSecurity DescriptionSettle Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
BUY
03/07/22 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/16/2016 1.625% 05/15/2026
912828R36 (596,554.69)(3,016.57)(599,571.26) 600,000.00 03/03/22
03/07/22 HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL
(CALLABLE) CORP
DTD 08/16/2021 1.100% 03/01/2027
438516CE4 (264,583.20)(51.33)(264,634.53) 280,000.00 03/03/22
03/16/22 HART 2022-A A3
DTD 03/16/2022 2.220% 10/15/2026
448977AD0 (154,994.03) 0.00 (154,994.03) 155,000.00 03/09/22
03/28/22 TARGET CORP CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 01/24/2022 1.950% 01/15/2027
87612EBM7 (145,041.00)(520.00)(145,561.00) 150,000.00 03/24/22
03/28/22 IBM CORP CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 02/09/2022 2.200% 02/09/2027
459200KM2 (120,833.75)(374.31)(121,208.06) 125,000.00 03/24/22
03/28/22 BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/15/2022 2.300% 03/15/2027
084664CZ2 (269,205.75)(228.40)(269,434.15) 275,000.00 03/24/22
03/28/22 TRUIST FINANCIAL CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/02/2021 1.267% 03/02/2027
89788MAD4 (255,332.00)(251.64)(255,583.64) 275,000.00 03/24/22
(4,442.25) (1,810,986.67)(1,806,544.42) 1,860,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
INTEREST
03/09/22 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE
CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 09/09/2021 1.300% 09/09/2026
02665WDZ1 0.00 1,300.00 1,300.00 200,000.00 03/09/22
03/15/22 COMET 2021-A3 A3
DTD 11/30/2021 1.040% 11/16/2026
14041NFY2 0.00 156.00 156.00 180,000.00 03/15/22
03/15/22 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/15/2021 0.250% 03/15/2024
91282CBR1 0.00 1,875.00 1,875.00 1,500,000.00 03/15/22
03/16/22 GMCAR 2022-1 A3
DTD 01/19/2022 1.260% 11/16/2026
380146AC4 0.00 63.00 63.00 60,000.00 03/16/22
03/20/22 VALET 2021-1 A3
DTD 12/13/2021 1.020% 06/22/2026
92868KAC7 0.00 89.25 89.25 105,000.00 03/20/22
03/21/22 HAROT 2021-4 A3
DTD 11/24/2021 0.880% 01/21/2026
43815GAC3 0.00 51.33 51.33 70,000.00 03/21/22
Account 73340100 Page 14
Page 77
For the Month Ending March 31, 2022Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST -
Transaction Type
Trade CUSIPSecurity DescriptionSettle Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
INTEREST
03/23/22 INTER-AMERICAN DEVEL BK NOTES
DTD 09/23/2021 0.500% 09/23/2024
4581X0DZ8 0.00 912.50 912.50 365,000.00 03/23/22
03/24/22 ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
29278TQD5 0.00 84.58 84.58 245,000.00 03/24/22
03/30/22 MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
58404DHQ7 0.00 110.75 110.75 245,000.00 03/30/22
4,642.41 4,642.41 0.00 2,970,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
SELL
03/07/22 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2020 0.125% 11/30/2022
91282CAX9 795,281.25 266.48 795,547.73 (4,874.99)(4,794.47)FIFO 800,000.00 03/03/22
03/16/22 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2020 0.125% 11/30/2022
91282CAX9 159,018.75 58.24 159,076.99 (1,012.50)(995.89)FIFO 160,000.00 03/09/22
03/28/22 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/15/2021 0.375% 07/15/2024
91282CCL3 675,147.66 525.83 675,673.49 (22,664.65)(23,627.95)FIFO 705,000.00 03/24/22
850.55 (29,418.31)(28,552.14) 1,630,298.21 1,629,447.66 1,665,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
(177,096.76) 1,050.71 (176,046.05) (28,552.14) (29,418.31)Managed Account Sub-Total
Total Security Transactions ($28,552.14)($176,046.05)$1,050.71 ($177,096.76)($29,418.31)
Account 73340100 Page 15
Page 78
DATE:April 20, 2022
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Mike McCliman, Fire Chief
Joseph Ramos, Emergency Management Coordinator
SUBJECT:Consideration to Continue the Existing Local Emergency Due to the Novel
Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council review and continue the need for the existing local
emergency due to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.
BACKGROUND:
On January 31, 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services declared the COVID-19
outbreak a public health emergency for the United States. The state of California followed this
public emergency, and the Governor declared a state of emergency on March 4, 2020, and the
President declared a national emergency on March 13, 2020. Subsequently, the San Bernardino
County Department of Public Health declared a public health emergency on March 10, 2020.
On March 18, 2020, pursuant to the California Emergency Services Act (Government Code
Section 8550 et. seq.) the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga proclaimed a local
emergency by the way of Resolution 2020-14.
On May 6, July 15, September 16, and November 18 of 2020, and March 17, May 5, July 7,
September 1, and November 3 of 2021 and February 16 of 2022, the City Council of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga reviewed the need to continue existence of the local emergency and agreed
to extend for an additional 60 days.
ANALYSIS:
Government Code Section 8630 requires the City Council to review the need for continuing the
local emergency every 60 days until the governing body terminates the emergency. On March 1,
2022 the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors terminated the emergency proclamation
originally proclaimed on March 10, 2020 due to the emergency condition no longer
existing. However, simultaneously on March 1, 2022 the San Bernardino County Board of
Supervisors proclaimed a local emergency within San Bernardino County resulting from the
impact of the novel coronavirus pandemic to the Emergency Medical Services system. The City
will continue to monitor the status of proclaimed emergency from both San Bernardino County
and the State of California.
Since the last review, City staff has regularly updated City Council on public health, economic and
Page 79
Page 2
1
2
3
2
social issues arising out of the COVID-19 pandemic. Given that the COVID-19 pandemic
continues to affect the region and the City, there remains a need to keep the emergency
declaration in place. This will allow the City to, among other things, continue assisting residents
and businesses affected by these various State and County orders and to effectively respond to
emergencies during the COVID-19 pandemic. Staff recommends keeping the local emergency
in place at this time.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The budgetary impact is unknown. Emergency operations, response and recovery efforts
continue to consume a significant amount of staff time. Various revenue sources, including sales
tax and transient occupancy tax (TOT) along with multiple City fees, have been significantly
reduced. The City will have to expend funds in the General Fund, and potentially reserves, to
combat COVID-19 and continue operations during this crisis. However, maintaining the local
emergency does not, in and of itself, result in a fiscal impact of the City. The emergency
declaration may allow the City to seek reimbursements for certain emergency protective
measures incurred in responding to the pandemic.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
By keeping the need for the local emergency and actively recovering eligible state and federal
emergency expenses, we are ensuring our community continues its efforts to be sustainable and
maintain a safe, healthy, and high quality of life for all residents.
ATTACHMENTS:
None
Page 80
DATE:April 20, 2022
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 Ceballos, Environmental Programs Manager
SUBJECT:Consideration to Schedule a Public Hearing for Placement of Liens for
Delinquent Solid Waste Accounts. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council schedule a public hearing for the placement of special
assessments/liens for delinquent solid waste accounts to take place on May 18, 2022, during the
regularly scheduled council meeting.
BACKGROUND:
Per Section 8.17.170 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, the requirements are
established for mandatory payment for residential, commercial and industrial solid waste
collection service. As a result, the municipal code requires all occupied properties within the City
to maintain weekly solid waste collection service provided by the existing franchise waste hauler,
or comply with the requirements of the self-haul permit program administered by City staff. This
section of the code allows fees that are delinquent for more than 60 days to become special
assessments against the respective parcels of land, resulting in liens on the property for the
amount of the delinquent fee, plus administrative charges.
ANALYSIS:
Upon approval to schedule the public hearing, the public hearing notices will be mailed out to
property owners with delinquent solid waste accounts that accrued from January 1, 2021 to
December 31, 2021. Notices will be sent via first class mail no less than 10 days prior to the public
hearing.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City will receive revenue in the form of a franchise fee when the delinquent accounts are paid
through the County of San Bernardino property tax collection process.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item is in line with Council Core Values, in ensuring all residential, commercial, and industrial
property owners are receiving mandatory trash service to ensure a healthy and safe community
for all.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
Page 81
DATE:April 20, 2022
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Boards of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Mike McCliman, Fire Chief
Augie Barreda, Deputy Fire Chief
Joseph Ramos, Emergency Management Coordinator
SUBJECT:Consideration to Accept the Emergency Management Performance Grant
Revenue in the Amount of $28,018, Awarded by the California Office of
Emergency Services and Administered by the San Bernardino County
Fire Department, Office of Emergency Services, Fiscal Year 2021.
(CITY/FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council / Fire Board accept grant revenue in the amount of
$28,018 awarded by the California’s Governor’s Office of Emergency Services and administered
by the San Bernardino County Fire Department, Office of Emergency Services under Fiscal Year
(FY) 2021 Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG). The grant funding will be used
for personnel costs within the Emergency Management Division.
BACKGROUND:
The EMPG FY 2021 funding is a non-competitive grant designated for each of the twenty-four
cities and towns within the County as members of the Operation Area (OA). Each jurisdiction is
allocated a $10,000 base, with the remainder of the grant distributed on a per capita basis to each
eligible jurisdiction. Funds must be used to support local emergency management program
activities that contribute to the State’s Goals and Objectives, and the County’s OA’s capability to
prevent, prepare for, mitigate against, respond to, and recover from emergencies and disasters,
whether natural or man-made. Although the allocation may vary each year, the City receives this
funding annually.
ANALYSIS:
The City of Rancho Cucamonga will continue to use these funds to assist with the implementation
and execution of the Fire District’s overall Emergency Management programs. This includes the
coordination and development of the Auxiliary Communication Services (ACS) for ham radio
operators and Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) programs. Also included are staff
training programs such as the Accountability Officer, Emergency Operations Center, and
WebEOC training. These programs fall in line with the goals and objectives of the State and
County to increase the disaster resiliency in the City through education and awareness of natural
and man-made disasters in our community.
Page 82
Page 2
1
2
1
5
FISCAL IMPACT:
Grant revenue will be received into account number 1383000-4740 (Emergency Management
Performance Grant Income). Up to $28,018 of grant revenue will be utilized to offset personnel
costs within the Fire District’s Emergency Management Division in account number 3281503-
5000 (Regular Salaries).
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item brings together portions of the Council’s vision and core value by providing a sustainable
City and promoting a safe and healthy community for all. This is accomplished by ensuring our
Emergency Management Division has the resources and tools necessary to provide City and Fire
District staff, as well as community members, with the skill set needed to manage a disaster of
any size.
ATTACHMENTS:
N/A
Page 83
DATE:April 20, 2022
TO:President and Members of the Board of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Mike McCliman, Fire Chief
Ty Harris, Deputy Fire Chief
Darci Vogel, Fire Business Manager
SUBJECT:Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Mary McGrath
Architects for Conceptual Design Build Services for the Fire Station 171,
Fire Station 173, and Fire Station 174 Projects in the Amount of $502,650,
and Authorization of an Appropriation of $502,650. (FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Fire Board:
1. Award a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) to Mary McGrath Architects in the
amount of $502,650 (including a 10% contingency of $45,695) for Conceptual Design
Build services for the rebuild of Fire Station 171, ADA accessibility improvements at Fire
Stations 173 and 174, and addition of an urban park in front of Fire Station 173; and
2. Authorize an appropriation of $502,650 to the Fire Capital Fund (Fund 288).
BACKGROUND:
In November 2019, the Fire District and Mary McGrath Architects entered into a PSA for
consulting services for the design-build of new Fire Station 178. This initial phase identified goals
and objectives, data collection, and the scope and scale of the project with the Design Team. In
August 2020, the contract was amended to include Conceptual Design Build services in
accordance with RFP# 20/21¬001. The scope of work for the project identified that the tasks
would likely be used for the rebuild of Fire Station 171 as a design-build process.
In December 2021, the Fire District identified the need to move forward with the rebuilding of Fire
Station 171 utilizing a design-build process. Built in 1974, it is the oldest and smallest fire station
in the city. As the building has aged, maintenance requests have increased, as well as the
associated repair costs. Most recently, the apparatus bay door went out of service and was
temporarily repaired while awaiting the delivery and installation of a new replacement door at an
estimated expense of $19,340. In addition to the mounting expenses, the station lacks the
functionality and physical space needed to accommodate the Fire District's diverse and growing
workforce. The station is out of compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), dorm
rooms are communal with cubicle-style partitions, mixed gender crews share one and a half
restrooms and one shower, and storage has overflowed into the apparatus bay. As the only
unsecured station in the city, Fire Station 171 lacks a fence and gate which allows public access
to all sides of the facility throughout the day and night.
Page 84
Page 2
1
1
9
4
The Fire District identified additional facility improvement projects that would be completed in
coordination with this design-build process in order to streamline the design and construction
process, as well as allow for greater flexibility in awarding a contract, higher quality work, and
greater cost certainty with fewer change orders and delays. These projects include:
ADA accessibility improvements to the restrooms at Fire Station 173 and 174 in alignment
with the ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan. In 1997 and 1998, the City and Fire
District completed an initial ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan to comply with the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. In November 2020, a consultant was hired to
complete a comprehensive ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan update to ensure that
a plan is in place for updating buildings, infrastructure improvements, programs, services,
and activities to meet current ADA and accessibility requirements.
The addition of an urban park space in the southeast corner of the Fire Station 173
property. Located directly adjacent to the decomposed granite path that connects to the
Pacific Electric Trail, the station is the ideal location for a staging area and rest point for
the community when utilizing the trail. The park elements will include shade, benches, a
water fill station, repair station, and rubber playground surfacing. The Fire District will
partner with the Community Services Department to include additional park elements
identified in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
ANALYSIS:
The Fire District is now prepared to begin the conceptual design build process for the Fire Station
171, 173, and 174 projects. Staff recommends that the Fire Board award a PSA to Mary McGrath
Architects for these services.
In alignment with the conceptual design build process for Fire Station 178, this will continue to be
a Team RC project with input from the City Manager's Office, Planning, Engineering, Public
Works, Building and Safety, DoIT, Community Services, and the Fire District. Mary McGrath
Architects will assist the Design Team with the following tasks: 1. Project initiation and program
development; 2. Conceptual site and floor plan design, criteria development; 3. Bridging
documents suitable to obtain design-build proposals; 4. Design-build team selection; 5.
Construction document review and design intent review.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total cost of the contract with Mary McGrath Architects is $502,650. In order to begin the
conceptual design build process, funding will need to be appropriated in the following accounts:
Account No.Funding
Source
Description Amount
3288501-5650 /
2090288-6311
Fire Protection
Capital Fund
Amethyst Station 171 /
Design & Enviro. Review
$337,380.00
3288501-5650 /
2093288-6311 *
Fire Protection
Capital Fund
FS 173 – ADA Improvements /
Design & Enviro. Review
$55,090.00
3288501-5650 /
2092288-6311 *
Fire Protection
Capital Fund
FS 174 – ADA Improvements /
Design & Enviro. Review
$55,090.00
3288501-5650 /
2094288-6311 *
Fire Protection
Capital Fund
FS 173 – Urban Park /
Design & Enviro. Review
$55,090.00
TOTAL:$502,650.00
Page 85
Page 3
1
1
9
4
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item brings together portions of the Council’s vision and core value 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 - Scope of Work
Page 86
March 14, 2022
Darci Vogel
Business Manager
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District
10500 Civic Center Dr.
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
Via E‐mail: Darci.Vogel@cityofrc.us
RE: Fire Stations 171, 173, 174 Scope and Fee Proposal for Bridging Documents
Dear Darci;
It is our pleasure to submit a draft scope of work and fee proposal to develop the bridging
documents for the replacement of Fire Station 171 at 6627 Amethyst Ave. The overall
goal of the project is to create Bridging Documents suitable for the District Team to
obtain Design‐Build conceptual designs and cost proposals through the Request for
Proposal phase of the procurement. We have tailored this scope of work to result in a
set of bridging documents that allows the DB Teams to develop and present a station
design as a part of their selection process for Fire Station 171.
In addition, we have created a work scope and fee proposal for the restroom upgrades
at Fire Stations 173 and 174. This scope of work includes the development of a small
urban park at Fire Station 173. Stations 173 and 174 will be designed to a level that can
be priced and completed by the Design/Built teams, similar to Fire Station 178.
It is assumed that all three fire station projects and the park will be issued as a package
to potential design/build teams. The proposed fee and scope will see the project through
the development of the construction documents by the selected Design Build Team.
Please see the fee breakdown detail with the scope of work attached.
We look forward to continuing our good working relationship with the City of Rancho
Cucamonga and RC Fire Protection District. Thank you for the opportunity!
Very sincerely,
Mary C. McGrath, AIA
Principal
Mary McGrath Architects
mmcgrath@marymcgratharchitects.com
License No. C24435
Page 87
1
City of Rancho Cucamonga and Rancho Cucamonga Fire District
Bridging Documents Scope of Work
The scope of work below was specifically developed for at Design/Build procurement process that
provides criteria documents which guide the Design/Build Team in the preparation of a proposed project
design and cost model. In this approach, the selected DB Team will then further refine the building design,
obtain the entitlements and environmental approvals then move on to the development of the
construction documents.
The scope of work below applies to the Fire Station No. 171 project although some of the program items
developed in these initial stages would most likely be used for the Fire Station 179 project in the future.
Project Description ‐ 6627 Amethyst Ave – Fire Station No. 171
The existing fire station 171 will be demolished and a new 2‐story, approximately 10,000 SF station
developed at the same site. The fire station replacement bridging documents will be based on the
standards developed for Fire Station 178. The overall scope for the project is as follows:
Task 1: Project Initiation and Program Development.
Project Initiation. The goal of the project initial is to establish the overall project schedule and confirm
the work plan; review Fire Department Team planning to date and standards; identify goals, objectives
and expectations through interviews, data collection, etc.; Hold Kick‐off meeting to establish overall
project schedule, work plan. Review site surveys and geotechnical reports prepared by the City
Consultant.
Program Development. General goal being to confirm and validate the scope and scale of the project
through an information gathering sessions with the Fire Department Design team. This program will be
confirmed through component diagrams and documented in a space needs outline. It is our
understanding that the current Fire Station 178 program documents would be used as a starting point for
confirming space needs and functional criterial. Deliverables will include:
Deliverables:
1.1 Overall Project Schedule with meeting dates identified.
1.2 Summary of goals, objectives and expectations discussed.
1.3 Comments on City provided site survey and geotechnical reports
1.4 Program Summary Narrative
1.5 Space Needs Outline including functional narratives
1.6 Component Diagram for each space with specialty equipment and utilities indicated
Page 88
2
1.7 Floor Plan Arrangement Diagram – Conceptual Space Plan
1.8 Site diagrams indicating response path, parking requirement and utilities
1.9 Calculations of stormwater retention requirements based on initial site diagram
1.10 Initial Construction Cost Budget (ICCB) ‐ Develop preliminary cost budget based on program.
1.11 Preliminary Code/Regulatory Agency review(s) for site criteria, entitlement and permitting
approval requirements and occupancy separation confirmations.
Task 2: Conceptual Site and Floor Plan Design, Criteria Development. General goal being to further
develop and define the site plan, floor plan and massing diagrams for District Team review and selection
of preferred schemes. Assemble conceptual design level documentation package sufficient to describe
project size, functional priorities, interior finishes, exterior finish performance criteria (no wood), time
critical construction completion requirements, level(s) of quality desired, security, audio/visual and
technology systems. In addition, a layout and performance criteria for the temporary facilities will be
included. Deliverables will include:
Deliverables:
2.1 Architectural Site and Floor Plan Design – Preparation of two alternate floor plans and massing
solution solutions for review and comments by the District Design Team.
2.2 Update the preferred plan based on Fire District Input and use in the preparation of finish
schedules and room‐based performance specifications.
2.3 Definition exterior building wall performance criteria including thermal ratings and wall
assemblies.
2.4 Prepare conceptual civil/site design, including criteria for grading, drainage, utilities, and other
requirements as appropriate for the project.
2.5 Develop written Basis of Design and performance narratives for Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, Data,
Plumbing and Security Systems. The room‐based performance criteria will be based on the
systems and finishes used at Station 178.
2.6 Develop a mechanical zoning plan.
2.7 Development of the Basis of Design and performance criteria for structural systems including
structural assembly types (metal stud vs. wood for example).
2.8 Landscape: Basis of design description of landscape design and irrigation requirements.
2.9 Site layout, floor plan layout and performance criteria for the temporary facilities.
2.10 Update of Initial Construction Cost Budget (ICCB) ‐ Update preliminary cost budget based on final
site layout and square footage.
Task 3: Bridging Documents. General goal is to refine the Task 2 documents to create Bridging Documents
suitable for the City Team to obtain Design‐Build proposals through a public agency procurement process.
It is intended that this process will include a design proposal phase as a part of the RFP process. To support
this effort our team will develop/produce final Bridging Documents including performance specifications,
Page 89
3
design narratives for each discipline, describing functional priorities, quality levels, aesthetic
requirements, design criteria, basic requirements to meet applicable building codes.
Bridging Document Design Package to include:
3.1 Project Description
3.2 Program Documentation: Fire Station Operations and Support Summary; Conceptual Space
Needs Outline, Component diagrams with room performance criteria. Fire Station Arrangement
diagram.
3.3 Architectural Floor Plans, Code Summary of concept plan, Massing Diagram, Finish Schedule
3.4 Structural Performance Requirements
3.5 MEP Performance Requirements
3.6 Grading and Drainage Criteria and Performance Requirements
3.7 Site Utility Conceptual Design and Performance Requirement
3.8 Temporary Facility Conceptual floor plan and site plan layout and performance criteria.
3.9 Detailed Specifications – All Disciplines
Task 4: Design‐Build Team Selection. General goal is to aid the District Team in pre‐qualifying prospective
Design‐Build teams to compete for the Project (in an RFQ/RFP fashion), and in selecting the most qualified
team. Review/comment on RFP prepared by City Team. Assist in reviewing qualifications. Assist in
developing best value criteria and scoring criteria. Attend Pre‐bid conference/presentation. Attend one‐
half day work sessions with each bidder (limited to three meetings). Respond to Requests for Design
Clarification and/or modifications. Consult with City Team concerning the determination or acceptability
of Design‐Build team’s proposed substitute materials and systems proposed by bidders. Consult with
District Team concerning the determination or acceptability of proposed changes in planning or approach.
Submit clarifications as appropriate. Assist in evaluation of design proposals and cost models. Review
design proposal and bids versus the weighted factors and develop a response for review by the City Team.
Respond to questions of the City Team, as appropriate.
Task 5: Construction Documents Review/Design Intent Review. General goal is to consult or support City
Team by reviewing the selected Design‐Build design and construction documents to assure compliance
with Bridging Documents design intent. During the design phase, meet once a month with the Design‐
Builder’s architect and engineers on a discipline‐by‐discipline basis for ‘over‐the‐shoulder’ reviews.
Function as liaison between City Team, the Design‐Build team architect and engineers, and the
stakeholders to assure design intent compliance.
Page 90
1
City of Rancho Cucamonga and Rancho Cucamonga Fire District
Bridging Documents Scope of Work
The scope of work below was specifically developed for at Design/Build procurement process that
provides criteria documents which guide the Design/Build Team in the preparation of a proposed project
design and cost model. In this approach, the selected DB Team will then further refine the project design,
obtain the entitlements and environmental approvals then move on to the development of the
construction documents.
The scope of work below applies to the Fire Station No. 173 and 174 restroom remodel projects and a
new park at the front of Fire Station 173. The restroom renovations will be based on the restroom schemes
develop for Fire Station 178. It is assumed that these bridging documents will be included in the same
package as Fire Station 171.
Project Description:
12270 Oak Creek Rd – Fire Station No. 173
The existing fire station 173 restroom and shower area will be renovated to provide gender neutral private
restroom/showers within the existing station.
In addition, a new playground/park will be developed in the front corner of the site. It is to be an Urban
park and include a bike station and a small play area developed form natural materials. Amenities include
a bottle fill area, rubberized surfaces, bike pumps with bike tools and a bike stand, shade structure, bike
racks, low level lighting and one security camera tied to the fire station. The utility services will be tied to
the fire station. The monument sign may be relocated if the add ition of building signage is not feasible (or
does not currently exist).
11297 Jersey Boulevard– Fire Station No. 174
The existing fire station 174 restroom and shower area will be renovated to provide gender neutral private
restroom/showers within the existing station.
Task 1: Project Initiation and Program Development.
Project Initiation. The project will start with an initial discussion with the City Staff regarding the goals for
the park/playground area at the front of the site. At the same time, the design team will be sketching
options for the restroom layout for review by the City.
Deliverables:
1.1 Summary of goals and objectives for the park design
1.2 Conceptual restroom layouts for each station (2 options each).
1.3 Preliminary MEP evaluation of service requirements for the conceptual layouts.
1.4 Initial Construction Cost Budget (ICCB) ‐ Develop preliminary cost budget based on goals.
Page 91
2
Task 2: Conceptual Park Design. General goal being to develop and define the park conceptual design,
identifying play equipment and landscape options, Deliverables will include:
Deliverables:
2.1 Preparation of two alternate park conceptual design options for review and comment by the
District Design Team.
2.2 Update the preferred Park Design plan based on Fire District Input.
2.3 Civil: Prepare park conceptual civil/site design, including criteria for grading, drainage, utilities,
and other requirements as appropriate for the selected design.
2.4 Lighting: Prepare park conceptual lighting and security plan based on the selected design.
2.5 Landscape: Basis of design description of landscape design, play equipment and irrigation
requirements.
2.6 Update of Initial Construction Cost Budget (ICCB) ‐ Update preliminary park cost budget based on
final layout.
Task 3: Bridging Documents. General goal is to refine the Task 1 and 2 documents to create Bridging
Documents suitable for the City Team to obtain Design‐Build proposals through a public agency
procurement process. It is intended that this process will include a design proposal phase as a part of the
RFP process. To support this effort our team will develop/produce final Bridging Documents including
performance specifications, design narratives for each discipline, describing functional priorities, quality
levels, aesthetic requirements, design criteria, basic requirements to meet applicable building codes.
Bridging Document Design Package to include:
3.1 Project Description
3.2 Restroom Renovations Architectural Floor Plans, demolition plan, Ceiling plan, building sections
necessary to demonstrate scope of work., Finish Schedule
3.3 Structural Concept Plan and Performance Requirements (anticipate only minor modifications).
3.4 Plumbing demolition plan and floor plan with fixture specifications.
3.5 Mechanical demolition plan and new equipment layout, Performance Requirements
3.6 Electrical demolition plan and new outlets, lighting, data, and equipment power plan
3.7 Performance criteria for fire sprinkler and fire alarm modifications.
3.8 Grading and Drainage Criteria and Performance Requirements
3.9 Site Utility Conceptual Design and Performance Requirement
3.10 Detailed Specifications – All Disciplines
3.11 Cost Estimate of Bridging Documents
Task 4: Design‐Build Team Selection. General goal is to aid the District Team in pre‐qualifying prospective
Design‐Build teams to compete for the Project (in an RFQ/RFP fashion), and in selecting the most qualified
team. Review/comment on RFP prepared by City Team. Assist in reviewing qualifications. Assist in
developing best value criteria and scoring criteria. Attend Pre‐bid conference/presentation. Attend one‐
half day work sessions with each bidder (limited to three meetings). Respond to Requests for Design
Clarification and/or modifications. Consult with City Team concerning the determination or acceptability
Page 92
3
of Design‐Build team’s proposed substitute materials and systems proposed by bidders. Consult with
District Team concerning the determination or acceptability of proposed changes in planning or approach.
Submit clarifications as appropriate. Assist in evaluation of design proposals and cost models. Review
design proposal and bids versus the weighted factors and develop a response for review by the City Team.
Respond to questions of the City Team, as appropriate.
Task 5: Construction Documents Review/Design Intent Review. General goal is to consult or support City
Team by reviewing the selected Design‐Build design and construction documents to assure compliance
with Bridging Documents design intent. During the design phase, meet once a month with the Design‐
Builder’s architect and engineers on a discipline‐by‐discipline basis for ‘over‐the‐shoulder’ reviews.
Function as liaison between City Team, the Design‐Build team architect and engineers, and the
stakeholders to assure design intent compliance.
Page 93
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Fire Station 171, 173, 174 and Park Bridging Document Fee Proposal
Task 1
Project Initiation and Program
Development
Mary McGrath
Architects PIC PM/SR. Arch
Architect/
Designer
Intermediate
Arch/Design Job Captain Technical Totals
rate $205 $180 $165 $145 $125 $125
hours 40 40 40 0 0
total amount $8,200 $0 $6,600 $5,800 $0 $0 $20,600
Consultant HVAC/Plumb. Elec./Data Structural Civil Landscape Cost Totals
total amount $0 $0 $0 $4,538 $0 $0 $4,538
$25,138
Task 2 Conceptual Site and Floor Plan Design
Criteria Development
Mary McGrath
Architects PIC PM/SR. Arch
Architect/
Designer
Intermediate
Arch/Design Job Captain Technical Totals
rate $205 $180 $165 $145 $125 $125
hours 60 0 60 60 0 0
total amount $12,300 $0 $9,900 $8,700 $0 $0 $30,900
Consultant HVAC/Plumb. Elec./Data Structural Civil Landscape Cost Totals
total amount $2,750 $4,730 $6,600 $6,765 $5,500 $7,040 $33,385
$64,285
Task 3 Bridging Documents
Mary McGrath
Architects PIC PM/SR. Arch
Architect/
Designer
Intermediate
Arch/Design Job Captain Technical Totals
rate $205 $180 $165 $145 $125 $125
hours 80 0 80 120 0 0
total amount $16,400 $0 $13,200 $17,400 $0 $0 $47,000
Consultant HVAC/Plumb. Elec./Data Structural Civil Landscape Cost Totals
total amount $15,400 $10,285 $2,750 $6,848 $4,180 $24,310 $63,773
$110,773
Task 4 DB Team Selection
Mary McGrath
Architects PIC PM/SR. Arch
Architect/
Designer
Intermediate
Arch/Design Job Captain Technical Totals
rate $205 $180 $165 $145 $125 $125
hours 60 0 40 0 0 0
total amount $12,300 $0 $6,600 $0 $0 $0 $18,900
Consultant HVAC/Plumb. Elec./Data Structural Civil Landscape Cost Totals
total amount $1,100 $1,265 $3,300 $908 $1,650 $5,280 $13,503
$32,403
Task 5 Construction Document Review for Design
Intent
Mary McGrath
Architects PIC PM/SR. Arch
Architect/
Designer
Intermediate
Arch/Design Job Captain Technical Totals
rate $205 $180 $165 $145 $125 $125
hours 80 0 40 0 0 0
total amount $16,400 $0 $6,600 $0 $0 $0 $23,000
Consultant HVAC/Plumb. Elec./Data Structural Civil Landscape Cost Totals
total amount $2,200 $3,520 $8,250 $1,815 $2,750 $0 $18,535
$41,535
Task 6 Station 173, 174 and Park
Mary McGrath
Architects PIC PM/SR. Arch
Architect/
Designer
Intermediate
Arch/Design Job Captain Technical Totals
rate $205 $180 $165 $145 $125 $125
hours 80 0 120 120 0 80
total amount $16,400 $0 $19,800 $17,400 $0 $10,000 $63,600
Consultant HVAC/Plumb. Elec./Data Structural Civil Landscape Cost Totals
total amount $22,500 $8,030 $12,650 $17,107 $18,810 $22,550 $101,647
$165,247
Total Fee:
Task 1 Project Initiation and Program Development $25,138
Task 2 Conceptual Site and Floor Plan Design Criteria Development $64,285
Task 3 Bridging Documents $110,773
Task 4 DB Team Selection $32,403
Task 5 Construction Document Review for Design Intent $41,535
Sub total: $274,133
Task 6 Station 173, 174 and Park $165,247
$439,380
Reimbursables Expenses $17,575
Reimbursable expenses would include travel expenses, mileage, printing, report publishing and rendering costs. Mileage will be calculated at the published government rate. All expenses will be billed
at cost with 10% mark‐up.
6 1 0 1 6 th S T R E E T, S U IT E 2 1 9 O A K L A N D , C A L IF O R N IA 9 4 6 1 2 O 5 1 0 .2 0 8 .9 4 0 0 W W W .M A R Y M C G R A T H A R C H IT E C T S .C O M
Page 94
DATE:April 20, 2022
TO:President and Members of the Board of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Mike McCliman, Fire Chief
Darci Vogel, Fire Business Manager
SUBJECT:Consideration to Accept as Complete, File a Notice of Completion, and
Authorize Release of Retention for the RCFPD Fire Station No. 176 Site
Improvements Project. (FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Fire Board of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District:
1. Accept the RCFPD Fire Station No. 176 Site Improvements Project, Contract No. FD
2020-009, as complete;
2. Approve the final contract amount of $84,282.39;
3. Authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Bond 35 days after recordation of Notice
of Completion and accept a Maintenance Guarantee Bond;
4. Authorize the release of the Labor and Materials Bond in the amount of $79,000, six
months after the recordation of said notice if no claims have been received;
5. Authorize the Fire Chief to file a Notice of Completion and release of the project retention,
35 days after recordation of Notice of Completion; and
6. Authorize the Fire Chief to approve the release of the Maintenance Bond one year
following the filing of the Notice of Completion if the improvements remain free from
defects in material and workmanship.
BACKGROUND:
On October 1, 2020, the Fire Board awarded a construction contract to OCC Builders, Inc. in the
amount $79,000 for the RCFPD Fire Station No. 176 Site Improvements Project. Additionally, the
City Council authorized a 10% contingency in the amount of $7,900 to address unforeseen
construction related incidentals. A Vicinity Map is included in attachment 1.
The scope of work to be performed consisted of the partial clear and grub, demolition and patch
and repair of existing concrete curb as required, partial demolition of existing site walls, new sand
bag concrete pad, earthwork regrading, removal of existing sand bag concrete k-rails, relocation
or capping of existing irrigation within area of work, installation of new site cmu site walls, and
installation of new stone gravel.
ANALYSIS:
The subject project has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications
Page 95
Page 2
1
1
9
6
and to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief. The final cost of the construction contract is $84,282.39,
a net increase of $5,779 resulting from one (1) Change Order, as summarized below:
Change Order No.1: During the course of the project, several adjustments to the project scope
required extra work to be performed by the contractor. This work included: additional backfill
behind the wall; installation of additional rebar for the concrete slab in the sand pit; forming and
pouring a 6” concrete curb above the finish floor of the sand pit; installation of an expansion joint
in the wall; and additional rock on the slope and in place of mulch. The extra work totaled $5,779,
which was covered by project contingency funds.
At the end of the one-year maintenance period, if the improvements remain free from defects in
materials and workmanship, the City Clerk is authorized to release the Maintenance Bond upon
approval by the Fire Chief.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The final contract amount for OCC Builders, Inc. Contract FD 2020-009, is $84,282.39. The total
final project cost, including construction inspection, soils and materials testing, and survey
services is $152,818.39, as shown below. Sufficient funds are available in the Fire Capital Fund
(3288501-5650 / 1995288) for the final project cost.
Final Construction Contract $ 84,282.39
Soils and Materials Testing Services $ 16,529.00
Survey Services $ 8,500.00
Construction Inspection Services $ 43,507.00
Total Project Costs $ 152,818.39
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item brings together portions of the Council’s vision and core value by providing a sustainable
City and promoting a safe and healthy community for all. This is accomplished by ensuring our
Fire first responders have the resources and tools necessary to train for and respond to
emergency situations.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Vicinity Map
Page 96
ATTACHMENT 1
PROJECT: RCFPD Fire Station No. 176 Site Improvements
Vicinity Map
NOT TO SCALE
Project Site
Page 97
DATE:April 20, 2022
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
Darren Chin, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT:Consideration to Approve Tract Map 19996, Located at 9353 Fairview
Place, on the Southwest Corner of Milliken Avenue and 6th Street, Related
to Case No. ENG2021-00021. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the final map of Tract 19996 on file with the City
Engineer.
BACKGROUND:
Tentative Tract Map No. 19996 was approved by the Planning Commission on February 24, 2021
for the re-subdivision of Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 16238, located at 9353 Fairview Place on the
southwest corner of Milliken Avenue and 6th Street. The map will subdivide the existing parcel into
eight (8) office condominium units. The original subdivision approved on October 22, 2003 by the
Planning Commission in 2003 has previously been developed with one- and two-story office
buildings. No new buildings or uses are proposed as part of this subdivision.
ANALYSIS:
The owner, Butterfield Villas, LLC has submitted the final map for Tract 19996 for consideration
of approval. The final map has been reviewed by Staff and found to be technically correct and in
conformity with the State and City subdivision regulations. All conditions of approval for the
subdivision required to be completed prior to recording of the final map have been satisfied.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
The subject subdivision supports the City Council’s vision of building on our success as a world
class community, to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunities for all
to thrive by ensuring that subdivision of land continues to add value to the community.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Page 98
ATTACHMENT 1
TRACT 19996
Vicinity Map
NOT TO SCALE
Page 99
DATE:April 20, 2022
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 of a Professional Services Agreement with Procure
America for Cost Reduction Consulting Services for the City’s Gas, Water,
and Electric Utilities Accounts. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council award and execute a three (3) year contract with Procure
America for cost reduction consulting services for the City’s gas, water, and electric utilities
accounts.
BACKGROUND:
Over time, the quantity and complexity of the City’s various utility accounts for gas, water, and
electricity have grown significantly. Periodic rate increases have been implemented by all of the
utility services providers during this time. While staff have performed general oversight of these
changes, detailed audits of the various accounts have not been performed increasing the risk that
the City may be paying an incorrect rate or paying for services that are no longer needed.
Other cities/agencies have engaged Procure America for similar projects. Those agencies
include, but are not limited to: County of Riverside, City of Covina, Jurupa Community Services
District, City of Irvine, County of San Diego, City of Pomona, County of Orange, City of Hayward,
City of Montebello, City of Moreno Valley, City of Santa Ana, and California State Polytechnic
University, Pomona.
ANALYSIS:
Staff became aware of a consultant, Procure America (PA), that can perform an audit of the City’s
various utility accounts to identify potential cost savings with minimal staff time required. The
audit will be conducted in three primary phases:
1. Review phase: PA will use its best efforts to obtain cost savings for the City’s benefit
by analyzing our policies, procedures, supplier contracts, past invoices, and other
pertinent information as it relates to the City’s utilities services set for review. PA will
gather information as to the City’s needs (past, present, and future) from the City’s
service providers so as to build a solution that not only lowers cost, but also matches
our operational requirements and expectations. After analyzing the City’s current
spending patterns, PA will provide us with a findings report outlining their observations.
The report will include a review of operations, cost reduction recommendations, and
potential service level enhancements. The report’s recommendations will also include
Page 100
Page 2
1
2
1
8
a comparison to the City’s historical cost or “Established Rates” to clearly outline the
cost savings generated by this project. It is understood that despite PA’s
recommendations, the City has the right not to proceed with any of PA’s result findings
or proposals.
2. Post-review phase: In the event that the City wishes to proceed with PA’s
recommendations, for the entire balance of the relationship with the City, PA will
continue to consult with the City in an effort to continuously look for efficiencies in the
chosen areas of focus (utilities services). Periodically, the PA team will review the City’s
invoicing and deliverables to ensure accountability by the City’s service providers with
respect to the spirit and intent of the agreement between the City and the third-party
service provider. This review will take into account service levels, cost controls, and
overall client satisfaction. Further, PA will continuously consult with the City to anticipate
changes in service needs to ensure that the proper service provider, contract, and
procedures are in place to address the City’s go forward requirements.
3. Revenue share: PA’s findings report will document the Established Rates and specific
recommendations for each service chosen for review and outline the methodology used
to generate the report. The City and PA will then discuss and agree on the Established
Rates for the targeted service as outlined in the findings report. If the City elects to
proceed with any or all of the recommendations as set forth in the findings report, the
City agrees to compensate PA for the savings outlined within the findings report. The
Revenue Share to PA is fifty percent (50%) or half of the actual realized savings
measured by the difference between the agreed upon Established Rates and the City’s
new costs as set forth in PA’s findings report and documented through actual realized
savings. PA will share in the identified savings for a period of three years. After the
three-year period has ended, the savings to the City will continue, and the City will no
longer be required to make the 50% payment.
A snapshot of the project timeline (April 25th through July 25th) and project milestones is as follows:
Item Week Date Responsibility
Kick off meeting & Document
Request
Week 1 April 25 CoRC Team, Procure
America
CoRC Returns LOAs, Vendor
Invoices, Facilities List, to
Procure America
Week 2 May 4 CoRC Team
Procure America Begins
Online Usage Download from
Providers
Week 3 May 11 Procure America
Data Analysis/TROS®Weeks 4 - 8 May 16 – June 13 Procure America
Site visits may need to be
conducted at City locations
CoRC Staff, Procure
America
Procure America Creates
TROS® Findings Report
with
Recommendations
Week 9 June 20 Procure America
Procure America Delivers
TROS® Findings Report to
City
Week 10-12 July 11 CoRC, Procure
America
TROS® = Tariff Rate Optimization Study
Page 101
Page 3
1
2
1
8
The proposed Professional Services Agreement is on file with the City Clerk’s Office.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The costs associated with this agreement, if the City chooses to proceed with PA’s
recommendations, will be covered by the savings achieved by the implementation of the specified
utility account modifications. The exact amount of savings is indeterminable at this point in time.
However, this item is being brought to the City Council for approval in the instance the fees for
service surpass the City Manager’s signing authority of $100,000. Budget transfers will be utilized
to move cost savings from the various utility accounts to the contract services accounts that PA
will be paid from in accordance with the City’s established policies.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Ensuring the City’s receives accurate rates for its utilities 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 operating expenditures to ensure that financial resources are available
to support the various services the City provides to all Rancho Cucamonga stakeholders.
ATTACHMENTS:
None
Page 102
DATE:April 20, 2022
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Romeo M. David, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT:Consideration of a Contract with Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in an
Amount of $371,000, Plus 10% Contingency for the Center Avenue
Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve the plans and specifications for the Center Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation
Project);
2. Accept the bids received for the Project;
3. Award and authorize the execution of a contract in the amount of $371,000 to the lowest
responsive bidder, Onyx Company, Inc., for the total Bid;
4. Authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $37,100;
5. Authorize a Purchase Order in the amount of $24,156 to Willdan, Inc. for on-call
construction inspection services; and
6. Authorize a Purchase Order in the amount of $13,255 to SCST, LLC Atlas Company for
on-call material testing services.
BACKGROUND:
Existing asphalt pavement condition for sections alongside Center Avenue have deteriorated to
the point that resurfacing is required to extend the life of pavement and improve rideability. The
Center Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project has been included in the Capital Improvement
Program budget for this Fiscal Year 2021/22. A Vicinity Map illustrating the limit of the Project is
included as Attachment 1.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga uses asphalt rubber hot mix overlay for major arterials as a
paving method to apply a new layer of asphalt to deteriorating roadway surfaces. Instead of
demolishing the old asphalt surface completely, asphalt rubber hot mix overlay uses the existing
layers as a base for the new asphalt pavement. An asphalt rubber hot mix overlay project extends
the life of the pavement an additional 15 to 20 years
ANALYSIS:
The scope of work consists of weed kill, routing and crack sealing, cold milling, asphalt rubber hot
mix overlay, adjusting existing manholes and valves to new grade, restriping and installation of
pavement markings, handicap ramps, curb and gutter, drive approach, and re-striping. The
contract documents call for thirty (30) working days to complete this project.
Page 103
Page 2
1
2
2
1
The Notice Inviting Bids was released to the general contracting community and was published
in the Daily Bulletin on March 15 and 22, 2022. The City Clerk’s Office facilitated the formal
solicitation for bidding the project.
On March 29, 2022, the City Clerk’s office received five (5) construction bids. The Engineer’s
Estimate for the project was $450,000. The apparent low bidder Onyx Paving Company, Inc.
submitted a bid in the amount of $371,000. A full bid summary is included as Attachment 2.
Engineering staff has reviewed all bids received and found all to be complete and in accordance
with the bid requirements with any irregularities to be inconsequential. Staff has completed the
required background investigation and finds the lowest responsive bidder Onyx Paving Company,
Inc. meets the requirements of the bid documents.
Staff has determined that the project is Categorically Exempt per Section 15301 “Existing
Facilities” subsection (c), Class 1 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
FISCAL IMPACT:
Anticipated construction costs are estimated to be as follows:
Expenditure Category Amount
Construction Contract $371,000
Construction Contract Contingency (10%)$37,100
Construction Inspection Services $24,156
Construction Materials Testing Services $13,255
Bid Noticing Advertisement $1,631
Estimated Construction Costs $447,142
A total of $475,000 is available in the approved Fiscal Year 2021/22 budget from the State Gas
Tax R&T7360 Fund (Fund 174) to cover the anticipated project costs. Funding for this project is
identified under Capital Improvement Project Account No. in the amount listed below:
Account No.Funding Source Description Amount
11743035650/2008174-0 Gas tax R&T7360
Fund (174)
Center Avenue $447,142
Total Project Funding $447,142
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 continuous improvement through the construction of high-
quality public improvements
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 - Bid Summary
Page 104
ATTACHMENT 1
PROJECT# 800-2021-11
"CENTER AVENUE PAVEMENT REHABILITATION
6TH STREET TO 8th STREET”
NOT TO SCALE
Project Site
Project Site
Page 105
UNIT BIDUNITBIDUNITBID UNIT BIDUNITBID UNIT BIDNO QTY UNIT DESCRIPTIONCOST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT11 LS Mobilization $18,962.00 $18,962.00 $17,000.00 $17,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $30,732.90 $30,732.90 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.0021 LS Traffic Control $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $27,000.00 $27,000.00 $18,961.00 $18,961.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $11,700.00 $11,700.00 $64,000.00 $64,000.0031 LS Clearing and Grubbing - Including all Removal and Disposal $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $10,500.00 $10,500.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.0041 LS Construction Staking (For Ramps Only) $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,800.00 $8,800.00 $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $8,900.00 $8,900.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $9,000.00 $9,000.0052,792 SF Construct PCC Access Ramp Including Truncated Detectable Warning Surfaces Complete in Place Per Plans and Specifications$17.00 $47,464.00 $11.00 $30,712.00 $11.00 $30,712.00 $13.00 $36,296.00 $14.60 $40,763.20 $13.00 $36,296.00624 SF Construct Additional Truncated Detectable Warning Surface on Existing Curb Ramp Per Plans and Specifications$55.00 $1,320.00 $60.00 $1,440.00 $90.00 $2,160.00 $80.00 $1,920.00 $130.00 $3,120.00 $134.00 $3,216.007479 LF Construct PCC Curb and Gutter Per Plans and Specifications Including Sawcut, Removal, and Disposal of Existing Curb and Gutter$60.00 $28,740.00 $55.00 $26,345.00 $80.00 $38,320.00 $55.00 $26,345.00 $49.50 $23,710.50 $57.00 $27,303.0081,297 SF Construct 4" PCC Spandrel Per Plans and Specifications Including Sawcut, Removal, and Disposal of Existing Spandrel$55.00 $71,335.00 $15.00 $19,455.00 $20.00 $25,940.00 $19.00 $24,643.00 $21.40 $27,755.80 $20.00 $25,940.009627 SF Construct 6" Full Depth AC Pavement Per Plans and Specifications Including Sawcut, Removal, and Disposal of Existing AC Pavement$25.00 $15,675.00 $20.00 $12,540.00 $18.00 $11,286.00 $15.00 $9,405.00 $11.00 $6,897.00 $10.00 $6,270.001036 LF Construct PCC Retaining Curb Per Plans and Specifications Including Sawcut, Removal, and Disposal of Existing Retaining Curb$50.00 $1,800.00 $55.00 $1,980.00 $50.00 $1,800.00 $55.00 $1,980.00 $67.30 $2,422.80 $60.00 $2,160.0011493 SF Construct 4" PCC Sidewalk Complete in Place Per Plans and Specifications Including Sawcut, Removal, and Disposal of Existing Sidewalk$12.00 $5,916.00 $10.00 $4,930.00 $11.00 $5,423.00 $13.00 $6,409.00 $12.35 $6,088.55 $10.50 $5,176.5012626 SF Construct PCC Driveway Per Plans and Specifications Including Sawcut, Removal, and Disposal of Existing Driveway$17.00 $10,642.00 $15.00 $9,390.00 $16.00 $10,016.00 $14.00 $8,764.00 $18.65 $11,674.90 $15.50 $9,703.001313 LF Construct PCC Retaining Curb and Paint it Red Per Plans and Specifications Including Sawcut, Removal, and Disposal of Existing Retaining Curb$75.00 $975.00 $55.00 $715.00 $50.00 $650.00 $75.00 $975.00 $66.40 $863.20 $60.00 $780.001410,966 SY 2" Cold Plane$2.60 $28,511.60 $2.00 $21,932.00 $2.00 $21,932.00 $2.35 $25,770.10 $2.59 $28,401.94 $2.65 $29,059.90151,234 TN 2" Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix Overlay (ARHM) $90.00 $111,060.00 $111.00 $136,974.00 $100.00 $123,400.00 $106.00 $130,804.00 $100.00 $123,400.00 $96.00 $118,464.00164 EA Remove Existing Tree Including Roots and Stump (Size 12" to 36" Diameter) $1,500.00 $6,000.00 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $1,600.00 $6,400.00 $2,400.00 $9,600.00 $1,600.00 $6,400.00 $1,630.00 $6,520.001719 EA Adjust Existing Manholes to Finish Grade $1,000.00 $19,000.00 $1,000.00 $19,000.00 $1,000.00 $19,000.00 $1,100.00 $20,900.00$1,025.00 $19,475.00 $1,000.00 $19,000.001836 EA Adjust Existing Valve Can and Cover to Finish Grade $200.00 $7,200.00 $100.00 $3,600.00 $300.00 $10,800.00 $150.00 $5,400.00$60.00 $2,160.00 $340.00 $12,240.00191 LS Striping and Signage Per Signing and Striping Plan Complete in Place$10,000.00 $10,000.00 $6,187.00 $6,187.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $6,500.00 $6,500.00 $7,760.00 $7,760.00 $6,400.00 $6,400.00202 EA Install Construction Notification Sign $1,200.00 $2,400.00 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,600.00 $3,200.00 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,100.00 $4,200.00 $1,100.00 $2,200.00BID $373,000.00BID $393,792.89TOTAL BASE BID AMOUNT: $450,000.60 CORRECTED $371,000.00 $375,000.00 $384,844.00 CORRECTED $380,292.89 $419,728.405VANCE CORPORATION THE R.J. NOBLE COMPANYBASE BID3BID DATE: MARCH 29, 2022ENGINEER'S ESTIMATECENTER AVENUE PAVEMENT REHABILIATION PROJECT- FROM 6TH STREET TO 8TH STREETAPPARENT LOW BIDDERONYX PAVING COMPANY, INC.4ALL AMERICAN ASPHALTHARDY & HARPER, INC.2ATTACHMENT 2 Page 106
Page 1 of 4
DATE:April 20, 2022
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Noah Daniels, Finance Director
SUBJECT:Consideration of (1) Resolution of Intent to Establish Street Lighting
Services Community Facilities District No. 2022-01; (2) Resolution of
Intent to Annex Future Territory to Street Lighting Services Community
Facilities District No. 2022-01; (3) Resolution of Intent to Establish
Industrial Area Services Community Facilities District No. 2022-02; (4)
Resolution of Intent to Annex Future Territory to Industrial Area Services
Community Facilities District No. 2022-02. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2022-
039, 2022-040, 2022-041 AND 2022-042) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 2022-039, a Resolution declaring its intention to establish the Street
Lighting Services Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting CFD).
2. Adopt Resolution No. 2022-040, a Resolution declaring its intention to annex territory in
the future to Street Lighting CFD.
3. Adopt Resolution No. 2022-041, a Resolution declaring its intention to establish the
Industrial Area Services Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial CFD).
4. Adopt Resolution No. 2022-042, a Resolution declaring its intention to annex territory in
the future to Industrial CFD.
BACKGROUND:
Street Lighting CFD: Currently, the City has a process for placing all new projects into the existing
Street Lighting Districts ("SLD") to help mitigate the costs for operating and maintaining street
lighting associated with new development. The current SLDs were established in the early 1980s
in conjunction with the development of the City. There are eight SLDs, consisting of approximately
56,883 total parcels, maintaining approximately 17,000 streetlights and 200 traffic signals.
While intended to bear the costs of the improvements that provide a special benefit to the property
owners, the SLDs cannot increase the assessment rate due to the passage of Proposition 218 in
1996, which required voter approval for rate increases after that date. The City's General Fund,
per the city policy authorized by the City Council, has provided subsidies to maintain the services
due to an inability to increase revenues for the existing SLDs. Eventually, all the SLDs will face
similar financial issues due to the inability to increase assessment revenues.
Page 107
Page 2 of 4
1
2
2
4
Industrial CFD: Starting in late 2020, it was noted that much of the industrial area that had been
developed and operated by "legacy" uses and tenants was being redeveloped. Many of these
major industrial businesses were present before the incorporation of the City or developed shortly
after. In addition, the City recognized that many multiple smaller properties in the City's industrial
area were relatively under-developed or developed with non-conforming uses.
ANALYSIS:
Street Lighting CFD
Recognizing the long-term financial problem, Finance began analyzing the proposed Street
Lighting CFD for future development, encompassing the City's boundary similar to the existing
SLDs.On a go-forward basis, newly developed properties will become annexed into the proposed
Street Lighting CFD instead of the SLD's. The assessment rates for the new Street Lighting CFD
can be adjusted annually as operating costs increase. While the new CFD does not solve the
fiscal challenges of the original SLD's, it will prevent the situation from worsening in the future.
The Properties currently annexed into an existing SLD are not impacted by this action.
The proposed Street Lighting CFD rates are based on the true budgeted costs for operating and
maintaining the City's streetlights without any contributions from the City's General Fund or use
of reserves. Also, the proposed rates include land use categories that are not part of the current
SLDs but are necessary for current and future development. Expanding the land use categories
in the Street Lighting CFD will help address mixed-use developments and the potential for
accessory units on single family lots.
Additionally, existing SLDs do not include a rate for undeveloped property, whereas the proposed
Street Lighting CFD will offset costs for the parcels' administration. The undeveloped rate will
allow the City to recover reasonable administrative costs for properties that have been annexed
but have not yet developed.
The table below illustrates the Street Lighting CFD rates by tax zone to correspond to the eight
existing SLDs:
Street Lighting CFD
Single Family
(per unit)
Multi Family
(per unit)
Non-
Residential
(per acre)
Undeveloped
(per parcel)
Zone 1 $22.67 $22.67 $45.34 $200.00
Zone 2 $75.17 $75.17 N/A $200.00
Zone 3 $47.15 $47.15 $94.30 $200.00
Zone 4 $28.96 $28.96 $57.92 $200.00
Zone 5 $63.79 N/A N/A $200.00
Zone 6 N/A N/A $51.40 $200.00
Zone 7 $58.64 $58.64 $117.28 $200.00
Zone 8 $37.79 $37.79 $75.58 $200.00
Page 108
Page 3 of 4
Following formation, and on an annual basis, the City will calculate the expenses and revenues
from the SLDs and Street Lighting CFD. Then, annually, the Street Lighting CFD rates may be
adjusted by a minimum of two percent (2%) to a maximum of six percent (6%) depending on the
actual changes in costs. These revenues will pay for expenses attributable to maintaining and
servicing streetlights, traffic signals, and appurtenant facilities.
Industrial CFD:
When the City Council took action to create a strategic pause to analyze and evaluate the City's
industrial code in light of more modern industrial development trends, Finance began analyzing
the financial impacts industrial development has on City's services. While industrial users create
many economic benefits for the City, industrial development can also impact the City's streets
and traffic management system, storm drain infrastructure, and calls for police services. To help
gain a better understanding of the benefits and impacts generated by industrial development, the
City developed a Fiscal Impact Analysis (FIA). The FIA factored in a holistic analysis of the
benefits, such as increased property tax revenue, business and employee sales tax revenue, and
impacts on public services and infrastructure.
The FIA report concluded a revenue shortfall of almost $3.5 million between projected revenues
from future industrial development and estimated expenditures. The FIA calculated approximately
$12,000 per acre would be needed to eliminate this shortfall to mitigate this fiscal impact. To
determine if this mitigation amount was financially feasible, staff met with several industrial
developers and brokers to discuss and evaluate market rents, property maintenance and
development costs, existing and planned governmental taxes, and reasonable rates of return on
investments. After these discussions, the staff determined it was financially feasible to set the
CFDs rate at $5,852 per acre for industrial development.
Unlike the Street Lighting CFD, the Industrial CFD is only applicable to the industrial portion of
the City. The proposed Industrial CFD will provide revenues for maintaining and servicing street
and roadway services and facilities, storm drain repair and maintenance, police safety calls and
service, landscaping and beautifying industrial areas, and creating a capital reserve account for
future repairs and maintenance in the industrial area.
Like the Street Lighting CFD, on an annual basis, the City will evaluate revenues and expenditures
for the services to the industrial area and adjust the Industrial CFD rate by a minimum of two
percent (2%) to a maximum of six percent (6%) depending on the actual changes in costs.
Resolutions of Intention to Establish Street Lighting CFD and Industrial CFD: The City initiated
both the Street Lighting CFD and Industrial CFD and collaborated with Bridge Point Rancho
Cucamonga, LLC ("Bridge") as the initial property owner to annex into both CFDs. The initial
property location for both CFDs is identified on the attached Boundary Map and consists of two
assessor's parcels, 0229-283-50 and 0229-283-51, more commonly referred to as 12434 4th
Street, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730. Bridge submitted a petition demonstrating their
concurrence to form both CFDs and their consent of the proposed levy. The petition is on file with
the City Clerk.
The first step in forming a community facilities district is the approval by the City Council of the
Resolution of Intention. The attached resolutions for the Street Lighting CFD and Industrial CFD
reference the boundary map and assessor's parcels for the properties that will become part of the
CFD when formed. Also included are the Rate and Method of Apportionment and a description of
the authorized services. These resolutions require a public hearing on June 1, 2022, when a
qualified electors (Bridge) election will be conducted.
Page 109
Page 4 of 4
1
2
2
4
After adopting the Resolutions of Intention, a public notice will be published in a local paper and
mailed to Bridge. On June 1, 2022, following the public hearing, the City Council may then adopt
resolutions authorizing the formation of the CFDs and calling an election regarding the proposed
levy. The City Clerk will receive the ballots of the qualified electors before the public hearing and,
at the public hearing, will provide the results of the election. The final action by the City Council
will be to adopt an ordinance authorizing the levy of special taxes. A second reading of the
ordinance is anticipated for June 15, 2022.
Resolution Declaring Intention for Future Annexations: The Resolutions of Intention for Future
Annexations will streamline staff and legal work regarding the annexation process, thus reducing
both time and costs. To ensure the annexations are completed, a condition of approval requiring
a property to annex to one, or both in the case of industrial development, of the CFDs will be
applied through the development approval process. The applicant will pay for the costs of future
annexations for the property to be annexed.
The proposed boundary map for the future annexation area for the Street Lighting CFD is the
City's boundaries, whereas the Industrial CFD consists of only the industrial portion of the City.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga submitted a petition for Street Lighting CFD and Industrial CFD
requesting the City Council initiate proceedings to annex territory in the future. These petitions
are on file with the City Clerk.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total fiscal impacts of the Street Lighting CFD and Industrial CFD cannot be determined
because it applies to future development.
The Street Lighting CFD will maintain streetlights, traffic signals, and appurtenant facilities. The
Street Lighting CFD rates can be adjusted annually based on actual operating cost increases.
The current SLDs cannot increase which results in the City's General Fund subsidizing the
operations of the SLDs. Once the Street Lighting CFD is formed any new development that is
annexed will pay for the true costs of street lighting services and not be subsidized by the City's
General Fund.
The Industrial CFD generates revenue for maintaining street and roadway services and facilities,
storm drain repair and maintenance, police safety calls and service, landscaping and beautifying
industrial areas, and creating a capital reserve. Although the Industrial CFD rate per acre is less
than the shortfall determined by the FIA, the revenues will help offset the impacts of new industrial
development in the City.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item supports the City Council's core values of intentionally embracing and anticipating the
future.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Resolution of Intention for CFD 2022-01
Attachment 2 – Resolution of Future Annexation for CFD 2022-01
Attachment 3 – Resolution of Intention for CFD 2022-02
Attachment 4 – Resolution of Future Annexation for CFD 2022-02
Page 110
Resolution No. 2022-039 - Page 1 of 6
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-039
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS
INTENTION TO ESTABLISH COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT NO. 2022-01 (STREET LIGHTING SERVICES)
OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND TO
AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX THEREIN TO
FINANCE MAINTENANCE OF STREET LIGHTS
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the "City") at this time desires to
initiate proceedings to create a community facilities district pursuant to the terms and
provisions of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982", being Chapter 2.5, Part
1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the "Act") for the
purpose of providing an alternative method of financing the municipal maintenance
services necessary to serve new development within such community facilities district;
and
WHEREAS, this community facilities district shall hereinafter be referred to as
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga ("CFD No. 2022-01"); and
WHEREAS, the Act provides that the City Council may initiate proceedings to
establish a community facilities City only if it has first considered and adopted local goals
and policies concerning the use of the Act; and
WHEREAS, this City Council has adopted local goals and policies as required
pursuant to the Act; and
WHEREAS, this City Council now desires to proceed to adopt its resolution of
intention to initiate proceedings for the establishment of CFD No. 2022-01, to set forth the
boundaries for CFD No. 2022-01, to indicate the type of services to be financed by CFD
No. 2022-01, to indicate the rate and apportionment of special tax sufficient to finance
such services and to set a time and place for a public hearing relating to the establishment
of CFD No. 2022-01; and
WHEREAS, a map of CFD No. 2022-01 (the "Boundary Map") is on file in the
Office of the City Clerk showing the boundaries of the territory proposed for inclusion in
CFD No. 2022-01 upon the initial establishment of CFD No. 2022-01 including properties
and parcels of land proposed to be subject to the levy of the special tax by CFD No. 2022-
01.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, California, as follows:
Attachment 1
Page 111
Resolution No. 2022-039 - Page 2 of 6
2
3
1
7
Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct.
Section 2. Initiation of Proceedings. These proceedings are initiated by this
City Council pursuant to the authorization of Section 53318 of the Government Code of
the State of California and the other provisions of the Act.
Section 3. Boundaries of CFD No. 2022-01. It is the intention of this City
Council to establish CFD No. 2022-01 pursuant to the provisions of the Act, and to
determine the boundaries and parcels on which the special tax may be levied to finance
the Authorized Services (defined in Section 5 below). A description of the boundaries of
the territory proposed for inclusion in CFD No. 2022-01 including properties and parcels
of land proposed to be subject to the levy of the special tax by CFD No. 2022-01 is as
follows:
All that property as shown on the Boundary Map designated
as "Proposed Boundaries of Community Facilities District No.
2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California" a
copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and shall
remain open for public inspection.
Said map is approved and, pursuant to Section 3110 of the California Streets and
Highways Code, the City Clerk shall, after conforming with the other requirements of
Section 3111 of said Code, record the original of said map, and not later than fifteen (15)
days prior to the date of the public hearing set forth in Section 7 hereof shall file a copy
of said map with the County Recorder of the County of San Bernardino.
Section 4. Name of the Community Facilities District. The name of the
Community Facilities District proposed to be established shall be known and designated
as "Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California."
Section 5. Descriptions of Services and Determination of Necessity. It is
the intention of this City Council to finance certain street light maintenance which are
more particularly described is in Exhibit A (the "Authorized Services") attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference.
The City Council finds that the Authorized Services described in this Section 5
hereof are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the City as a result of new
development occurring within the boundaries of the proposed CFD No. 2022-01.
Section 6. Special Tax. It is hereby further proposed that, except where funds
are otherwise available, a special tax sufficient to finance the Authorized Services (the
"Special Tax") and related incidental expenses authorized by the Act, secured by
recordation of a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property in CFD No. 2022-01,
will be levied annually within the boundaries of such CFD No. 2022-01. For further
particulars as to the rates and method of apportionment of the proposed Special Tax,
Page 112
Resolution No. 2022-039 - Page 3 of 6
2
3
1
7
reference is made to the attached and incorporated Exhibit B (the "Rates and Method"),
which sets forth in sufficient detail the rate and method of apportionment of the Special
Tax to allow each landowner or resident within proposed CFD No. 2022-01 to clearly
estimate the maximum amount of Special Tax that such person will have to pay for the
Authorized Services. The Special Tax may not be prepaid.
The Special Tax herein authorized, to the extent possible, shall be collected in the
same manner as ad valorem property taxes or in such other manner as this City Council
or its designee shall determine, including direct billing of the affected property owners.
Such Special Tax shall be subject to the same penalties, procedure, sale and lien priority
in any case of delinquency as applicable for ad valorem taxes. Any Special Tax that may
not be collected on the County tax roll shall be collected through a direct billing procedure
by the City.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 53340 and except as provided in
Government Code Section 53317.3, properties of entities of the state, federal, and local
governments shall be exempt from the levy of the Special Tax.
Section 7. Public Hearing. NOTICE IS GIVEN THAT ON JUNE 1, 2022 AT
7:00 PM, IN THE REGULAR MEETING PLACE OF THE CITY COUNCIL BEING 10500
CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, 91730 OR VIA
TELECONFERENCE AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY DUE TO COVID-19 SOCIAL
DISTANCING GUIDELINES, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD WHERE THIS CITY
COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PROPOSED CFD NO.
2022-01, THE PROPOSED METHOD AND APPORTIONMENT OF THE SPECIAL TAX,
AND ALL OTHER MATTERS AS SET FORTH IN THIS RESOLUTION OF INTENTION.
AT THE ABOVE-MENTIONED TIME AND PLACE FOR PUBLIC HEARING ANY
INTERESTED PERSONS, INCLUDING TAXPAYERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS MAY
APPEAR AND BE HEARD. THE TESTIMONY OF ALL INTERESTED PERSONS FOR
OR AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT,
THE EXTENT OF THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT, OR THE FINANCING OF
AUTHORIZED SERVICES, WILL BE HEARD AND CONSIDERED. ANY PROTESTS
MAY BE MADE ORALLY OR IN WRITING. HOWEVER, ANY PROTESTS PERTAINING
TO THE REGULARITY OR SUFFICIENCY OF THE PROCEEDINGS SHALL BE IN
WRITING AND CLEARLY SET FORTH THE IRREGULARITIES AND DEFECTS TO
WHICH THE OBJECTION IS MADE. ALL WRITTEN PROTESTS SHALL BE FILED
WITH THE CITY CLERK ON OR BEFORE THE TIME FIXED FOR THE PUBLIC
HEARING. WRITTEN PROTESTS MAY BE WITHDRAWN IN WRITING AT ANY TIME
BEFORE THE CONCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IF A WRITTEN MAJORITY PROTEST AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CFD
NO. 2022-01 IS FILED, THE PROCEEDINGS SHALL BE ABANDONED. IF SUCH
MAJORITY PROTEST IS LIMITED TO CERTAIN AUTHORIZED SERVICES, THOSE
SERVICES SHALL BE ELIMINATED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
Section 8. Election. If, following the public hearing described in the Section
above, the City Council determines to establish CFD No. 2022-01 and proposes to levy
Page 113
Resolution No. 2022-039 - Page 4 of 6
2
3
1
7
the Special Tax within CFD No. 2022-01, the City Council shall then submit the levy of
the Special Tax to the qualified electors of CFD No. 2022-01. If at least twelve (12)
persons, who need not necessarily be the same 12 persons, have been registered to vote
within CFD No. 2022-01 for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the close of the public
hearing, the vote shall be by registered voters of CFD No. 2022-01, with each voter having
one (1) vote. Otherwise, the vote shall be by the landowners of CFD No. 2022-01 who
were the owners of record at the close of the subject hearing, with each landowner or the
authorized representative thereof, having one (1) vote for each acre or portion of an acre
of land owned within CFD No. 2022-01.
A successful election relating to the Special Tax authorization shall, as applicable,
establish the appropriations limit as authorized by Article XIIIB of the California
Constitution as it is applicable to CFD No. 2022-01.
Section 9. Notice of Public Hearing. Notice of the time and place of the public
hearing shall be given by the City Clerk by causing the publication of a Notice of Public
Hearing in the legally designated newspaper of general circulation, such publication
pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code, with such publication to be completed
at least seven (7) days prior to the date set for the public hearing.
Section 10. Report. The City Manager, as the officer of the City who will be
responsible for providing the Authorized Services to be provided within and financed by
CFD No. 2022-01, if established, shall study or cause CFD No. 2022-01 to be studied,
and, at or before the time of the public hearing as described in Section 7, file a report or
cause a report to be filed with the City Council containing a brief description of the
Authorized Services which will in his opinion be required to adequately meet the needs
of CFD No. 2022-01, and his or her estimate of the fair and reasonable cost of providing
such services, and the incidental expenses to be incurred in connection therewith. Such
report shall be made a part of the record of the hearing to be held pursuant to Section 7
hereof.
Section 11. Advances of Funds or Work In-Kind. At any time either before or
after the formation of CFD No. 2022-01, the City Council may accept advances of funds
or work-in-kind from any source, including, but not limited to, private persons or private
entities and may provide, by resolution, for the use of those funds or that work-in-kind for
any authorized purpose, including, but not limited to, paying any cost incurred by the City
in creating CFD No. 2022-01. The City may enter into an agreement, by resolution, with
the person or entity advancing the funds or work-in-kind, to repay all or a portion of the
funds so advanced, or to reimburse the person or entity for the value, or cost, whichever
is less, of the work-in-kind, as determined by the City Council. No such agreement shall
constitute a debt or liability of the City.
Page 114
Resolution No. 2022-039 - Page 5 of 6
2
3
1
7
Section 12. Effective Date. This resolution shall become effective upon its
adoption.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a
Regular Meeting thereof held this 20th day of April, 2022, by the following roll call vote to
wit:
Page 115
Resolution No. 2022-039 - Page 6 of 6
2
3
1
7
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 20th day of April, 2022.
__________________________________
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) ss
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA )
I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California,
do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted
by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular Meeting of
said City Council held on the 20th day of April, 2022.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
Executed this 21st day of April, 2022, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
Page 116
A-1
EXHIBIT A
DESCRIPTION OF AUTHORIZED SERVICES
The City may finance any services which may be funded with proceeds of the special tax
of CFD No. 2022-01, authorized pursuant to Section 53313 of the Act, including but not limited to
all costs attributable to maintaining and servicing street lights, traffic signals and appurtenant
facilities throughout CFD No. 2022-01. Services include personnel, materials, contracting
services, utilities, and all necessary costs associated with the maintenance, replacement, and
repair required to keep the improvements in operational and satisfactory condition. In addition to
payment of the cost and expense of the forgoing services, proceeds of the special tax may be
expended to pay "Administrative Expenses," as said term is defined in the Rate and Method.
Page 117
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 1
B-1
ATTACHMENT 1
EXHIBIT B
RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT FOR
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2022-01
(STREET LIGHTING SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
A Special Tax, as hereinafter defined, shall be levied and collected for Community Facilities District No.
2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“CFD No. 2022-01”) each Fiscal Year
commencing in Fiscal Year 2022/23, in an amount determined by the application of the procedures below.
All Taxable Property, as hereinafter defined, unless exempted by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be
taxed for the purposes, to the extent and in the manner herein provided.
A. DEFINITIONS
The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meaning:
“Accessory Dwelling Unit” or “ADU” means a secondary residential unit of limited size, as defined
in California Government Code Section 65852.2, as may be amended from time to time, that is
accessory to a single-unit dwelling. The ADU may be on the same Assessor’s Parcel as the single-
unit dwelling or on a separate Assessor’s Parcel. For purposes of clarification, where an ADU and
primary Unit are on the same Assessor’s Parcel, the ADU located on such Assessor’s Parcel is
considered a separate Unit from the primary Unit on such Assessor’s Parcel for purposes of the
Special Tax. Should an Assessor’s Parcel contain only an ADU, such Assessor’s Parcel will be taxed
as an ADU only.
“Acre or Acreage” means the land area of an Assessor’s Parcel as shown on an Assessor’s Parcel
Map or in the Assessor’s Data for each Assessor’s Parcel. In the event that the Assessor’s Parcel Map
or Assessor’s Data shows no acreage, the Acreage for any Assessor’s Parcel may be determined by
the CFD Administrator based upon the applicable condominium plan, final map, parcel map or
calculated using available spatial data and GIS.
“Act” means the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, being Chapter 2.5 of
Part 1, Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State.
“Administrative Expenses” means the actual or reasonably estimated costs directly related to the
administration of CFD No. 2022-01 including, but not limited to, the following: the costs of
computing the Annual Special Tax Requirement and the annual Special Tax and of preparing the
annual Special Tax collection schedules; the costs of collecting the Special Tax, including any charges
levied by the County Auditor’s Office, Tax Collector’s Office or Treasurer’s Office; the costs of the
City or designee in complying with the disclosure requirements of the California Government Code
(including the Act), including public inquiries regarding the Special Tax; the costs of the City or
designee related to an appeal of the Special Tax; and the costs of commencing and pursuing to
completion any action arising from any delinquent Special Tax in CFD No. 2022-01. Administrative
Expenses shall also include amounts estimated or advanced by the City or CFD No. 2022-01 for any
other administrative purposes, including, but not limited to, attorney’s fees.
Page 118
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2
B-2
“Annual Services Costs” means the amounts required to fund services authorized to be funded by
CFD No. 2022-01.
“Annual Special Tax Requirement” means that amount with respect to CFD No. 2022-01
determined by the City Council or designee as required in any Fiscal Year to pay: (1) the
Administrative Expenses, (2) the Annual Services Costs, (3) any amount required to establish or
replenish any reserve or replacement fund established in connection with CFD No. 2022-01, and (4)
any reasonably anticipated delinquent Special Tax based on the delinquency rate for any Special Tax
levied in the previous Fiscal Year.
“Assessor’s Data” means Units, Acreage, or other information contained in the records of the
County Assessor for each Assessor’s Parcel.
“Assessor’s Parcel” or “Parcel” means a lot or parcel shown in an Assessor’s Parcel Map with an
assigned Assessor’s Parcel Number.
“Assessor’s Parcel Map” means an official map of the Assessor of the County designating parcels
by Assessor’s Parcel Number.
“Assessor’s Parcel Number” means, with respect to an Assessor’s Parcel, that number assigned to
such Assessment’s Parcel by the County Assessor for purposes of identification.
“Boundary Map” means that map recorded with the County recorder’s office on _______ in Book
__ at Page __ as Document Number _____.
“CFD Administrator” means an official of the City, or designee thereof, responsible for determining
the Annual Special Tax Requirement and providing for the levy and collection of the Special Taxes.
“CFD No. 2022-01” means Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga.
“City” means the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
“City Council” means the City Council of the City, acting as the legislative body of CFD No. 2022-01.
“County” means the County of San Bernardino, California.
“County Assessor” means the County Assessor of the County.
“Developed Property” means, in any Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property in CFD No. 2022-01 for which
a building permit for new construction was issued by the City prior to April 1 of the preceding Fiscal
Year.
“Exempt Property” means all Assessors’ Parcels within the boundary of CFD No. 2022-01 which are
exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to Section E.
“Fiscal Year” means the period starting July 1 and ending on the following June 30.
“GIS” means a geographic information system.
“Maximum Special Tax” means the maximum Special Tax authorized for levy in any Fiscal Year that
may apply to Taxable Property as described in Section C.
Page 119
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3
B-3
“Mixed Use Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels that have been classified by the City to allow
multiple uses on each such Assessor’s Parcel. For an Assessor’s Parcel of Mixed Use Property, each
property use thereon is subject to taxation pursuant to section C below. The Acreage used to
calculate the Special Tax for a portion of an Assessor’s Parcel that is Non-Residential Property shall
include only the share of such Assessor’s Parcel that will be used as Non-Residential Property, to
include structures, parking and other Parcel area.
“Multi-Family Residential Property” means, in any Fiscal Year, all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed
Property with two or more Units that share a single Assessor’s Parcel Number, are offered for rent
to the general public, and cannot be purchased by individual homebuyers, according to Assessor’s
Data or as otherwise known by the CFD Administrator. Multi-Family Property also means, in any
Fiscal Year, all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property with one Unit with a single Assessor’s Parcel
Number that is a condominium pursuant the definition in Civil Code Section 4125 or a townhome.
“Non-Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property within the
boundaries of CFD 2022-01 for which a building permit(s) has been issued for a non-residential
structure(s).
“Open Space Property” means property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2022-01 which (i) has
been designated with specific boundaries and Acreage on a final subdivision map as open space, (ii)
is classified by the County Assessor as open space, (iii) has been irrevocably offered for dedication
as open space to the federal government, the State, the County, the City, or any other public agency,
or (iv) is encumbered by an easement or other restriction required by the City limiting the use of
such property to open space.
“Property Owner’s Association” means any property owner’s association. As used in this
definition, a Property Owner’s Association includes any home-owner’s association, condominium
owner’s association, master or sub-association or non-residential owner’s association.
“Property Owner’s Association Property” means any property within the boundaries of CFD No.
2022-01 which is (a) owned by a Property Owner’s Association or (b) designated with specific
boundaries and acreage on a final subdivision map as property owner association property.
“Proportionately” means for Developed Property and Undeveloped Property, that the ratio of the
Special Tax levy to the Maximum Annual Special Tax is equal within each respective Tax Zone.
“Public Property” means any property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2022-01 which (i) is owned
by a public agency, (ii) has been irrevocably offered for dedication to a public agency, or (iii) is
designated with specific boundaries and Acreage on a final subdivision map as property which will
be owned by a public agency. For purposes of this definition, a public agency includes the federal
government, the State, the County, the City, school districts, or any other public agency.
“Rate and Method of Apportionment” means this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special
Tax for CFD No. 2022-01.
“Single Family Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property with a
residential structure intended as a single primary Unit.
Page 120
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 4
B-4
“Special Tax” means the annual special tax to be levied in each Fiscal Year on each Assessor’s Parcel
of Taxable Property to fund the Annual Special Tax Requirement.
“State” means the State of California.
“Tax Escalation Factor” means on July 1 of each Fiscal Year, commencing on July 1, 2023, the
Maximum Special Tax as shown in Section C shall be increased by a minimum of two percent (2%)
to a maximum of six percent (6%), determined on an annual basis as needed to satisfy the Special
Tax Requirement.
“Tax Zone” means an area within which the Special Tax may be levied pursuant to this Rate and
Method of Apportionment. All the Taxable Property within CFD No. 2022-01 at the time of its
formation is within Tax Zone Nos. 1 and 6. Additional Tax Zones may be created when property is
annexed to CFD No. 2022-01, and a separate Maximum Special Tax shall be identified for property
within each new Tax Zone at the time of such annexation. The Assessor’s Parcels included within a
new Tax Zone when such Parcels are annexed to CFD No. 2022-01 shall be identified by Assessor’s
Parcel number in the annexation documents at the time of annexation.
“Taxable Property” means all the Assessor’s Parcels within the boundaries of CFD No. 2022-01 that
are not exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to law or Section E below.
“Undeveloped Property” means all the Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property within the
boundaries of CFD No. 2022-01 that are not Developed Property.
“Unit” means an individual residential living space. The number of Units assigned to each Assessor’s
Parcel may be determined by (i) referencing Assessor’s Data, (ii) site surveys and physical unit
counts, and/or (iii) other research by the CFD Administrator.
“Welfare Exempt Property” means, in any Fiscal Year, all Parcels within the boundaries of CFD No.
2022-01 that have been granted a welfare exemption by the County under subdivision (g) of
Section 214 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
B. DETERMINATION OF TAXABLE PARCELS
On, or about, July 1 of each Fiscal Year, the CFD Administrator shall determine the valid Assessor’s
Parcel Numbers for all Taxable Property within CFD No. 2022-01. If any Assessor’s Parcel Numbers
are no longer valid, the CFD Administrator shall determine the new Assessor’s Parcel Number or
Numbers in effect for the then-current Fiscal Year. To the extent a Parcel or Parcels of Taxable
Property are subdivided, consolidated, or otherwise reconfigured, the Maximum Special Tax shall
be assigned to the new Assessor’s Parcels Numbers pursuant to Section C. The CFD Administrator
shall also determine: (i) the Tax Zone within which each Parcel is located; (ii) which Parcels are
Developed Property and Undeveloped Property; (iii) the number of Units or Acreage each Parcel
contains; (iv) the property type, i.e., Single Family Residential Property, Non-Residential Property,
etc.; and (v) the Annual Special Tax Requirement for the Fiscal Year.
C. MAXIMUM ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX RATE
The Maximum Special Tax for each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property within Tax Zone Nos. 1-8
shall be assigned according to the tables on the following pages.
Page 121
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 5
B-5
In some instances, an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property may contain more than one property
land use. The Maximum Special Tax assigned to an Assessor’s Parcel of Mixed Use Property shall
be the sum of the Maximum Special Tax for all property uses located on that Assessor’s Parcel.
Additionally, Accessory Dwelling Units will be levied at 50% of the applicable Maximum Special Tax
Rate for the property type of the primary Unit.
Tax Zone No. 1
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Single Family Residential Property $22.67 per Unit
Multi-Family Residential Property $22.67 per Unit
Non-Residential Property $45.34 per Acre
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
Tax Zone No. 2
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Single Family Residential Property $75.17 per Unit
Multi-Family Residential Property $75.17 per Unit
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
Tax Zone No. 3
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Single Family Residential Property $47.15 per Unit
Multi-Family Residential Property $47.15 per Unit
Non-Residential Property $94.30 per Are
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
Page 122
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 6
B-6
Tax Zone No. 4
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Single Family Residential Property $28.96 per Unit
Multi-Family Residential Property $28.96 per Unit
Non-Residential Property $57.92 per Acre
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
Tax Zone No. 5
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Single Family Residential Property $63.79 per Unit
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
Tax Zone No. 6
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Non-Residential Property $51.40 per Acre
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
Tax Zone No. 7
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Single Family Residential Property $58.64 per Unit
Multi-Family Residential Property $58.64 per Unit
Non-Residential Property $117.28 per Acre
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
Page 123
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 7
B-7
Tax Zone No. 8
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Single Family Residential Property $37.79 per Unit
Multi-Family Residential Property $37.79 per Unit
Non-Residential Property $75.58 per Acre
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
On July 1 of each Fiscal Year, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax for Tax Zone
Nos. 1-8 shall be increased by an amount equal to the Tax Escalation Factor.
A different Maximum Special Tax rate and Tax Escalation Factor may be identified in Tax Zones
added to CFD No. 2022-01 as a result of future annexations.
D. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF THE SPECIAL TAX
All Taxable Property shall be subject to a Special Tax defined as follows.
The Special Tax shall be levied each Fiscal Year by the CFD Administrator. The Annual Special Tax
Requirement shall be apportioned to each Parcel within CFD No. 2022-01 by the method shown
below.
First: Determine the Annual Special Tax Requirement.
Second: Levy the Special Tax on each Parcel of Developed Property and Undeveloped Property,
Proportionately, up to the applicable Maximum Special Tax.
Under no circumstances will the Special Tax on any Assessor’s Parcel used for private residential
purposes be increased by more than 10% as a consequence of delinquency or default by the owner
of any other Assessor’s Parcel within CFD No. 2022-01.
E. EXEMPTIONS
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax, no
Special Tax shall be levied on Property Owner’s Association Property, Assessor’s Parcels with public
or utility easements making impractical their utilization for any use other than the purposes set
forth in the easement, or Public Property, except as otherwise provided in Sections 53317.3,
53317.5, and 533401 of the Act.
Welfare Exempt Property shall thereafter be exempt from the Special Tax for as long as the property
qualifies as Welfare Exempt Property.
F. APPEAL OF SPECIAL TAX LEVY
Any property owner may file a written appeal of the Special Tax with the CFD Administrator claiming
that the amount or application of the Special Tax is not correct. The appeal must be filed not later
Page 124
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8
B-8
than one calendar year after having paid the Special Tax that is disputed, and the appellant must be
current in all payments of the Special Tax. In addition, during the term of the appeal process, all
Special Tax levied must be paid on or before the payment date established when the levy was made.
The appeal must specify the reasons why the appellant claims the Special Tax is in error. The CFD
Administrator shall review the appeal, meet with the appellant if the CFD Administrator deems
necessary, and advise the appellant of its determination.
If the property owner disagrees with the CFD Administrator’s decision relative to the appeal, the
owner may then file a written appeal with the City Council whose subsequent decision shall be final
and binding on all interested parties. If the decision of the CFD Administrator or subsequent decision
by the City Council requires the Special Tax to be modified or changed in favor of the property
owner, the CFD Administrator shall determine if sufficient Special Tax revenue is available to make
a cash refund. If a cash refund cannot be made, then an adjustment shall be made to credit future
Special Taxes.
This procedure shall be exclusive and its exhaustion by any property owner shall be a condition
precedent to filing any legal action by such owner.
G. INTERPRETATION OF RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT
The City Council may, by resolution or ordinance, interpret, clarify and/or revise this Rate and
Method of Apportionment to correct any inconsistency, vagueness, or ambiguity as it relates to the
Special Taxes, method of apportionment, classification of Assessor’s Parcels, or any definition used
herein, as long as such correction does not materially affect the levy and collection of Special Taxes.
In addition, the interpretation and application of any section of this document shall be at the City’s
discretion.
H. MANNER AND DURATION OF SPECIAL TAX
The Special Tax shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem
property taxes, provided that the City may directly bill the Special Tax, may collect the Special Tax
at a different time or in a different manner if needed to meet the financial obligations of CFD No.
2022-01, and may collect delinquent Special Taxes through available methods.
A Special Tax shall be levied commencing in Fiscal Year 2022/23 to the extent necessary to satisfy
the Annual Special Tax Requirement and shall be levied for as long as required to satisfy the Annual
Special Tax Requirement.
I. PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
The Special Tax may not be prepaid.
Page 125
Resolution No. 2022-040 - Page 1 of 4
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-040
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING
INTENTION TO ANNEX TERRITORY IN THE FUTURE TO
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2022-01 (STREET
LIGHTING SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the "City") desires to provide the
authorization to annex territory in the future to a community facilities district pursuant to the terms
and provisions of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982," being Chapter 2.5, Part 1,
Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the "Act"), and specifically
Article 3.5 thereof. The community facilities district has been designated as Community Facilities
District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga ("CFD No. 2022-
01"); and,
WHEREAS, it is determined to be within the public interest and convenience to establish
a procedure to allow and provide for future annexations to CFD No. 2022-01 and further to specify
the amount of special tax that would be levied and set forth the terms and conditions for
certification of any annexation in the future; and,
WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be annexed in the future shall be known and
designated as Future Annexation Area Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (the "Future
Annexation Area"), and a map designated as "Proposed Boundaries of the Future Annexation
Area of Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California" showing the territory proposed to be
annexed in the future is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and shall be kept with the transcript
of these proceedings.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, California, as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct.
Section 2. Authorization. These proceedings for future annexations are authorized
and initiated by this legislative body pursuant to the authorization of the Act and specifically
Section 53339.2 of the Government Code of the State of California.
Section 3. Public Convenience and Necessity. This City Council hereby
determines that the public convenience and necessity requires a procedure to allow and authorize
territory to be annexed in the future to CFD No. 2022-01 in order to finance the costs and
expenses for the authorized services
Section 4. Boundaries of CFD No. 2022-01 and Territory Proposed to be Annexed
in the Future. A general description of the territory included in CFD No. 2022-01 is hereinafter
described as follows:
Attachment 2
Page 126
Resolution No. 2022-040 - Page 2 of 4
All that property and territory as previously included within CFD No.
2022-01, as said property was shown on a map designated as
"Proposed Boundaries of Community Facilities District No. 2022-01
(Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
County of San Bernardino, State of California," a copy of which is
on file in the Office of the City Clerk and shall remain open for public
inspection.
A description of the boundaries and territory proposed to be annexed in the future is as
follows:
All that property and territory proposed to be annexed in the future
to CFD No. 2022-01, as said property is shown on the map
designated as “Proposed Boundaries of the Future Annexation
Area of Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting
Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San
Bernardino, State of California,” a copy of which is on file in the
Office of the City Clerk and shall remain open for public inspection.
Future annexation proceedings may only be completed with the unanimous consent of the
owner or owners of any parcel proposed for annexation.
Section 5. Name of CFD No. 2022-01 and Future Annexation Area. The name of
CFD No. 2022-01 is "Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California", and the designation
for the Future Annexation Area shall be Future Annexation Area, Community Facilities District No.
2022-01 (Street Lighting Services).
Section 6. Authorized Services. The types of services to be financed from the levy
of the special tax in CFD No. 2022-01, including the Future Annexation Area, are those described
in Exhibit A hereto which is incorporated herein by this reference ("Authorized Services").
The Authorized Services to be financed by the levy of special taxes to be levied on specific
territory within the Future Annexation Area to be annexed to CFD No. 2022-01 may include some
or all of such Authorized Services or may include alternatives to the Authorized Services.
The Authorized Services shall to the maximum extent practicable, taking into account
budgetary and operational demands of the City, be provided in common within CFD No. 2022-01
and the Future Annexation Area.
The City Council finds that the Authorized Services described in this Section 6 hereof are
necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the City as a result of new development
occurring within the boundaries of CFD No. 2022-01 and the Future Annexation Area.
Section 7. Special Tax. It is hereby further proposed that, except where funds are
otherwise available, a special tax sufficient to finance the Authorized Services (the "Special Tax")
to be provided in the territory of the Future Annexation Area upon the annexation of such territory
to CFD No. 2022-01 and related incidental expenses authorized by the Act, secured by
recordation of a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property in the Future Annexation
Area that annexes to CFD No. 2022-01, will be levied annually within the boundaries of the
territory within the Future Annexation Area upon the annexation of such territory to CFD No. 2022-
Page 127
Resolution No. 2022-040 - Page 3 of 4
01. For further particulars as to the rates and method of apportionment of the proposed Special
Tax, reference is made to the attached and incorporated Exhibit B (the "Rates and Method"),
which sets forth in sufficient detail the rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax to
allow each landowner or resident within the territory in proposed Future Annexation Area to clearly
estimate the maximum amount of the Special Tax that such person will have to pay for the
Authorized Services upon the annexation of such territory to CFD No. 2022-01. The Special Tax
may not be prepaid.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the actual cost of providing Authorized Services to
territory within any territory within the proposed Future Annexation Area is higher or lower than
the cost of providing such services within the existing Community Facilities District, a higher or
lower special tax may be levied within such territory subject to the unanimous approval and
election of the owner or owners of such territory. In any such circumstance, the Rate and Method
may be revised to reflect the higher or lower special tax, as applicable.
The Special Tax herein authorized, to the extent possible, shall be collected in the same
manner as ad valorem property taxes or in such other manner as this City Council or its designee
shall determine, including direct billing of the affected property owners. Such Special Tax shall
be subject to the same penalties, procedure, sale and lien priority in any case of delinquency as
applicable for ad valorem taxes. Any Special Tax that may not be collected on the County tax roll
shall be collected through a direct billing procedure by the City.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 53340 and except as provided in Government
Code Section 53317.3, properties of entities of the state, federal, and local governments shall be
exempt from the levy of the Special Tax.
Section 8. Effective Date of Future Annexation. Annexation of territory in the future
shall be effective upon the unanimous approval and election of the owner or owners of any such
parcel authorizing the levy of the Special Tax upon such parcel following the annexation of such
parcel to CFD No. 2022-01, and no further public hearings or additional proceedings will be
required to accomplish such annexation.
Section 9. Public Hearing. NOTICE IS GIVEN THAT ON JUNE 1, 2022 at 7:00 PM,
IN THE REGULAR MEETING PLACE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF BEING 10500 CIVIC
CENTER DRIVE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA OR VIA TELECONFERENCE AS
DIRECTED BY THE CITY DUE TO COVID-19 SOCIAL DISTANCING GUIDELINES, A PUBLIC
HEARING WILL BE HELD WHERE THIS CITY COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER THE ANNEXATION
OF CERTAIN TERRITORY IN THE FUTURE TO THE CFD NO. 2022-01, THE PROPOSED
METHOD AND APPORTIONMENT OF THE SPECIAL TAX TO BE LEVIED WITHIN SAID
PROPOSED FUTURE ANNEXATION AREA AND ALL OTHER MATTERS AS SET FORTH IN
THIS RESOLUTION OF INTENTION. ANY INTERESTED PERSONS MAY APPEAR AND BE
HEARD, AND WRITTEN PROTESTS SHALL BE FILED ON OR BEFORE THE TIME FIXED FOR
THE PUBLIC HEARING.
Section 10. Notice. Notice of the time and place of the public hearing shall be given
by the City Clerk by causing the publication of a Notice of Public Hearing in the legally designated
newspaper of general circulation, such publication pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government
Code, with such publication to be completed at least seven (7) days prior to the date set for the
public hearing.
Page 128
Resolution No. 2022-040 - Page 4 of 4
Section 11. Effective Date. This resolution shall become effective upon its adoption.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular
Meeting thereof held this 20th day of April, 2022, by the following roll call vote to wit:
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 20th day of April, 2022.
__________________________________
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) ss
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA )
I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular Meeting of said City Council held on
the 20th day of April, 2022.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
Executed this 21st day of April, 2022, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
Page 129
Resolution No. 2022-040 - Page 5 of 4
EXHIBIT A
DESCRIPTION OF AUTHORIZED SERVICES
The City may finance any services which may be funded with proceeds of the special tax
of CFD No. 2022-01, authorized pursuant to Section 53313 of the Act, including but not limited to
all costs attributable to maintaining and servicing street lights, traffic signals and appurtenant
facilities throughout CFD No. 2022-01. Services include personnel, materials, contracting
services, utilities, and all necessary costs associated with the maintenance, replacement, and
repair required to keep the improvements in operational and satisfactory condition.
In addition to payment of the cost and expense of the forgoing services, proceeds of the
special tax may be expended to pay "Administrative Expenses," as said term is defined in the
Rate and Method.
Page 130
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 1
B-1
EXHIBIT B
RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT FOR
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2022-01
(STREET LIGHTING SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
A Special Tax, as hereinafter defined, shall be levied and collected for Community Facilities District No.
2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“CFD No. 2022-01”) each Fiscal Year
commencing in Fiscal Year 2022/23, in an amount determined by the application of the procedures below.
All Taxable Property, as hereinafter defined, unless exempted by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be
taxed for the purposes, to the extent and in the manner herein provided.
A. DEFINITIONS
The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meaning:
“Accessory Dwelling Unit” or “ADU” means a secondary residential unit of limited size, as defined
in California Government Code Section 65852.2, as may be amended from time to time, that is
accessory to a single-unit dwelling. The ADU may be on the same Assessor’s Parcel as the single-
unit dwelling or on a separate Assessor’s Parcel. For purposes of clarification, where an ADU and
primary Unit are on the same Assessor’s Parcel, the ADU located on such Assessor’s Parcel is
considered a separate Unit from the primary Unit on such Assessor’s Parcel for purposes of the
Special Tax. Should an Assessor’s Parcel contain only an ADU, such Assessor’s Parcel will be taxed
as an ADU only.
“Acre or Acreage” means the land area of an Assessor’s Parcel as shown on an Assessor’s Parcel
Map or in the Assessor’s Data for each Assessor’s Parcel. In the event that the Assessor’s Parcel Map
or Assessor’s Data shows no acreage, the Acreage for any Assessor’s Parcel may be determined by
the CFD Administrator based upon the applicable condominium plan, final map, parcel map or
calculated using available spatial data and GIS.
“Act” means the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, being Chapter 2.5 of
Part 1, Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State.
“Administrative Expenses” means the actual or reasonably estimated costs directly related to the
administration of CFD No. 2022-01 including, but not limited to, the following: the costs of
computing the Annual Special Tax Requirement and the annual Special Tax and of preparing the
annual Special Tax collection schedules; the costs of collecting the Special Tax, including any charges
levied by the County Auditor’s Office, Tax Collector’s Office or Treasurer’s Office; the costs of the
City or designee in complying with the disclosure requirements of the California Government Code
(including the Act), including public inquiries regarding the Special Tax; the costs of the City or
designee related to an appeal of the Special Tax; and the costs of commencing and pursuing to
completion any action arising from any delinquent Special Tax in CFD No. 2022-01. Administrative
Expenses shall also include amounts estimated or advanced by the City or CFD No. 2022-01 for any
other administrative purposes, including, but not limited to, attorney’s fees.
Page 131
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2
B-2
“Annual Services Costs” means the amounts required to fund services authorized to be funded by
CFD No. 2022-01.
“Annual Special Tax Requirement” means that amount with respect to CFD No. 2022-01
determined by the City Council or designee as required in any Fiscal Year to pay: (1) the
Administrative Expenses, (2) the Annual Services Costs, (3) any amount required to establish or
replenish any reserve or replacement fund established in connection with CFD No. 2022-01, and (4)
any reasonably anticipated delinquent Special Tax based on the delinquency rate for any Special Tax
levied in the previous Fiscal Year.
“Assessor’s Data” means Units, Acreage, or other information contained in the records of the
County Assessor for each Assessor’s Parcel.
“Assessor’s Parcel” or “Parcel” means a lot or parcel shown in an Assessor’s Parcel Map with an
assigned Assessor’s Parcel Number.
“Assessor’s Parcel Map” means an official map of the Assessor of the County designating parcels
by Assessor’s Parcel Number.
“Assessor’s Parcel Number” means, with respect to an Assessor’s Parcel, that number assigned to
such Assessment’s Parcel by the County Assessor for purposes of identification.
“Boundary Map” means that map recorded with the County recorder’s office on _______ in Book
__ at Page __ as Document Number _____.
“CFD Administrator” means an official of the City, or designee thereof, responsible for determining
the Annual Special Tax Requirement and providing for the levy and collection of the Special Taxes.
“CFD No. 2022-01” means Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga.
“City” means the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
“City Council” means the City Council of the City, acting as the legislative body of CFD No. 2022-01.
“County” means the County of San Bernardino, California.
“County Assessor” means the County Assessor of the County.
“Developed Property” means, in any Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property in CFD No. 2022-01 for which
a building permit for new construction was issued by the City prior to April 1 of the preceding Fiscal
Year.
“Exempt Property” means all Assessors’ Parcels within the boundary of CFD No. 2022-01 which are
exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to Section E.
“Fiscal Year” means the period starting July 1 and ending on the following June 30.
“GIS” means a geographic information system.
“Maximum Special Tax” means the maximum Special Tax authorized for levy in any Fiscal Year that
may apply to Taxable Property as described in Section C.
Page 132
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3
B-3
“Mixed Use Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels that have been classified by the City to allow
multiple uses on each such Assessor’s Parcel. For an Assessor’s Parcel of Mixed Use Property, each
property use thereon is subject to taxation pursuant to section C below. The Acreage used to
calculate the Special Tax for a portion of an Assessor’s Parcel that is Non-Residential Property shall
include only the share of such Assessor’s Parcel that will be used as Non-Residential Property, to
include structures, parking and other Parcel area.
“Multi-Family Residential Property” means, in any Fiscal Year, all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed
Property with two or more Units that share a single Assessor’s Parcel Number, are offered for rent
to the general public, and cannot be purchased by individual homebuyers, according to Assessor’s
Data or as otherwise known by the CFD Administrator. Multi-Family Property also means, in any
Fiscal Year, all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property with one Unit with a single Assessor’s Parcel
Number that is a condominium pursuant the definition in Civil Code Section 4125 or a townhome.
“Non-Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property within the
boundaries of CFD 2022-01 for which a building permit(s) has been issued for a non-residential
structure(s).
“Open Space Property” means property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2022-01 which (i) has
been designated with specific boundaries and Acreage on a final subdivision map as open space, (ii)
is classified by the County Assessor as open space, (iii) has been irrevocably offered for dedication
as open space to the federal government, the State, the County, the City, or any other public agency,
or (iv) is encumbered by an easement or other restriction required by the City limiting the use of
such property to open space.
“Property Owner’s Association” means any property owner’s association. As used in this
definition, a Property Owner’s Association includes any home-owner’s association, condominium
owner’s association, master or sub-association or non-residential owner’s association.
“Property Owner’s Association Property” means any property within the boundaries of CFD No.
2022-01 which is (a) owned by a Property Owner’s Association or (b) designated with specific
boundaries and acreage on a final subdivision map as property owner association property.
“Proportionately” means for Developed Property and Undeveloped Property, that the ratio of the
Special Tax levy to the Maximum Annual Special Tax is equal within each respective Tax Zone.
“Public Property” means any property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2022-01 which (i) is owned
by a public agency, (ii) has been irrevocably offered for dedication to a public agency, or (iii) is
designated with specific boundaries and Acreage on a final subdivision map as property which will
be owned by a public agency. For purposes of this definition, a public agency includes the federal
government, the State, the County, the City, school districts, or any other public agency.
“Rate and Method of Apportionment” means this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special
Tax for CFD No. 2022-01.
“Single Family Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property with a
residential structure intended as a single primary Unit.
Page 133
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 4
B-4
“Special Tax” means the annual special tax to be levied in each Fiscal Year on each Assessor’s Parcel
of Taxable Property to fund the Annual Special Tax Requirement.
“State” means the State of California.
“Tax Escalation Factor” means on July 1 of each Fiscal Year, commencing on July 1, 2023, the
Maximum Special Tax as shown in Section C shall be increased by a minimum of two percent (2%)
to a maximum of six percent (6%), determined on an annual basis as needed to satisfy the Special
Tax Requirement.
“Tax Zone” means an area within which the Special Tax may be levied pursuant to this Rate and
Method of Apportionment. All the Taxable Property within CFD No. 2022-01 at the time of its
formation is within Tax Zone Nos. 1 and 6. Additional Tax Zones may be created when property is
annexed to CFD No. 2022-01, and a separate Maximum Special Tax shall be identified for property
within each new Tax Zone at the time of such annexation. The Assessor’s Parcels included within a
new Tax Zone when such Parcels are annexed to CFD No. 2022-01 shall be identified by Assessor’s
Parcel number in the annexation documents at the time of annexation.
“Taxable Property” means all the Assessor’s Parcels within the boundaries of CFD No. 2022-01 that
are not exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to law or Section E below.
“Undeveloped Property” means all the Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property within the
boundaries of CFD No. 2022-01 that are not Developed Property.
“Unit” means an individual residential living space. The number of Units assigned to each Assessor’s
Parcel may be determined by (i) referencing Assessor’s Data, (ii) site surveys and physical unit
counts, and/or (iii) other research by the CFD Administrator.
“Welfare Exempt Property” means, in any Fiscal Year, all Parcels within the boundaries of CFD No.
2022-01 that have been granted a welfare exemption by the County under subdivision (g) of
Section 214 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
B. DETERMINATION OF TAXABLE PARCELS
On, or about, July 1 of each Fiscal Year, the CFD Administrator shall determine the valid Assessor’s
Parcel Numbers for all Taxable Property within CFD No. 2022-01. If any Assessor’s Parcel Numbers
are no longer valid, the CFD Administrator shall determine the new Assessor’s Parcel Number or
Numbers in effect for the then-current Fiscal Year. To the extent a Parcel or Parcels of Taxable
Property are subdivided, consolidated, or otherwise reconfigured, the Maximum Special Tax shall
be assigned to the new Assessor’s Parcels Numbers pursuant to Section C. The CFD Administrator
shall also determine: (i) the Tax Zone within which each Parcel is located; (ii) which Parcels are
Developed Property and Undeveloped Property; (iii) the number of Units or Acreage each Parcel
contains; (iv) the property type, i.e., Single Family Residential Property, Non-Residential Property,
etc.; and (v) the Annual Special Tax Requirement for the Fiscal Year.
Page 134
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 5
B-5
C. MAXIMUM ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX RATE
The Maximum Special Tax for each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property within Tax Zone Nos. 1-8
shall be assigned according to the tables on the following pages.
In some instances, an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property may contain more than one property
land use. The Maximum Special Tax assigned to an Assessor’s Parcel of Mixed Use Property shall
be the sum of the Maximum Special Tax for all property uses located on that Assessor’s Parcel.
Additionally, Accessory Dwelling Units will be levied at 50% of the applicable Maximum Special Tax
Rate for the property type of the primary Unit.
Tax Zone No. 1
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Single Family Residential Property $22.67 per Unit
Multi-Family Residential Property $22.67 per Unit
Non-Residential Property $45.34 per Acre
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
Tax Zone No. 2
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Single Family Residential Property $75.17 per Unit
Multi-Family Residential Property $75.17 per Unit
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
Tax Zone No. 3
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Single Family Residential Property $47.15 per Unit
Multi-Family Residential Property $47.15 per Unit
Non-Residential Property $94.30 per Are
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
Page 135
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 6
B-6
Tax Zone No. 4
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Single Family Residential Property $28.96 per Unit
Multi-Family Residential Property $28.96 per Unit
Non-Residential Property $57.92 per Acre
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
Tax Zone No. 5
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Single Family Residential Property $63.79 per Unit
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
Tax Zone No. 6
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Non-Residential Property $51.40 per Acre
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
Tax Zone No. 7
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Single Family Residential Property $58.64 per Unit
Multi-Family Residential Property $58.64 per Unit
Non-Residential Property $117.28 per Acre
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
Page 136
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 7
B-7
Tax Zone No. 8
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Single Family Residential Property $37.79 per Unit
Multi-Family Residential Property $37.79 per Unit
Non-Residential Property $75.58 per Acre
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
Increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
On July 1 of each Fiscal Year, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax for Tax Zone
Nos. 1-8 shall be increased by an amount equal to the Tax Escalation Factor.
A different Maximum Special Tax rate and Tax Escalation Factor may be identified in Tax Zones
added to CFD No. 2022-01 as a result of future annexations.
D. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF THE SPECIAL TAX
All Taxable Property shall be subject to a Special Tax defined as follows.
The Special Tax shall be levied each Fiscal Year by the CFD Administrator. The Annual Special Tax
Requirement shall be apportioned to each Parcel within CFD No. 2022-01 by the method shown
below.
First: Determine the Annual Special Tax Requirement.
Second: Levy the Special Tax on each Parcel of Developed Property and Undeveloped Property,
Proportionately, up to the applicable Maximum Special Tax.
Under no circumstances will the Special Tax on any Assessor’s Parcel used for private residential
purposes be increased by more than 10% as a consequence of delinquency or default by the owner
of any other Assessor’s Parcel within CFD No. 2022-01.
E. EXEMPTIONS
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax, no
Special Tax shall be levied on Property Owner’s Association Property, Assessor’s Parcels with public
or utility easements making impractical their utilization for any use other than the purposes set
forth in the easement, or Public Property, except as otherwise provided in Sections 53317.3,
53317.5, and 533401 of the Act.
Welfare Exempt Property shall thereafter be exempt from the Special Tax for as long as the property
qualifies as Welfare Exempt Property.
F. APPEAL OF SPECIAL TAX LEVY
Page 137
Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8
B-8
Any property owner may file a written appeal of the Special Tax with the CFD Administrator claiming
that the amount or application of the Special Tax is not correct. The appeal must be filed not later
than one calendar year after having paid the Special Tax that is disputed, and the appellant must be
current in all payments of the Special Tax. In addition, during the term of the appeal process, all
Special Tax levied must be paid on or before the payment date established when the levy was made.
The appeal must specify the reasons why the appellant claims the Special Tax is in error. The CFD
Administrator shall review the appeal, meet with the appellant if the CFD Administrator deems
necessary, and advise the appellant of its determination.
If the property owner disagrees with the CFD Administrator’s decision relative to the appeal, the
owner may then file a written appeal with the City Council whose subsequent decision shall be final
and binding on all interested parties. If the decision of the CFD Administrator or subsequent decision
by the City Council requires the Special Tax to be modified or changed in favor of the property
owner, the CFD Administrator shall determine if sufficient Special Tax revenue is available to make
a cash refund. If a cash refund cannot be made, then an adjustment shall be made to credit future
Special Taxes.
This procedure shall be exclusive and its exhaustion by any property owner shall be a condition
precedent to filing any legal action by such owner.
G. INTERPRETATION OF RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT
The City Council may, by resolution or ordinance, interpret, clarify and/or revise this Rate and
Method of Apportionment to correct any inconsistency, vagueness, or ambiguity as it relates to the
Special Taxes, method of apportionment, classification of Assessor’s Parcels, or any definition used
herein, as long as such correction does not materially affect the levy and collection of Special Taxes.
In addition, the interpretation and application of any section of this document shall be at the City’s
discretion.
H. MANNER AND DURATION OF SPECIAL TAX
The Special Tax shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem
property taxes, provided that the City may directly bill the Special Tax, may collect the Special Tax
at a different time or in a different manner if needed to meet the financial obligations of CFD No.
2022-01, and may collect delinquent Special Taxes through available methods.
A Special Tax shall be levied commencing in Fiscal Year 2022/23 to the extent necessary to satisfy
the Annual Special Tax Requirement and shall be levied for as long as required to satisfy the Annual
Special Tax Requirement.
I. PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
The Special Tax may not be prepaid.
Page 138
Resolution No. 2022-041 - Page 1 of 5
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-041
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS
INTENTION TO ESTABLISH COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT NO. 2022-02 (INDUSTRIAL AREA SERVICES) OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND TO AUTHORIZE
THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX THEREIN TO FINANCE
INDUSTRIAL SERVICES
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the "City") at this time desires to initiate
proceedings to create a community facilities district pursuant to the terms and provisions of the
"Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982", being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of
the Government Code of the State of California (the "Act") for the purpose of providing an
alternative method of financing the municipal industrial services necessary to serve new
development within such community facilities district; and
WHEREAS, this community facilities district shall hereinafter be referred to as Community
Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga ("CFD
No. 2022-02"); and
WHEREAS, the Act provides that the City Council may initiate proceedings to establish a
community facilities City only if it has first considered and adopted local goals and policies
concerning the use of the Act; and
WHEREAS, this City Council has adopted local goals and policies as required pursuant
to the Act; and
WHEREAS, this City Council now desires to proceed to adopt its resolution of intention to
initiate proceedings for the establishment of CFD No. 2022-02, to set forth the boundaries for CFD
No. 2022-02, to indicate the type of services to be financed by CFD No. 2022-02, to indicate the
rate and apportionment of special tax sufficient to finance such services and to set a time and
place for a public hearing relating to the establishment of CFD No. 2022-02; and
WHEREAS, a map of CFD No. 2022-02 (the "Boundary Map") is on file in the Office of the
City Clerk showing the boundaries of the territory proposed for inclusion in CFD No. 2022-02 upon
the initial establishment of CFD No. 2022-02 including properties and parcels of land proposed to
be subject to the levy of the special tax by CFD No. 2022-02.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, California, as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct.
Section 2. Initiation of Proceedings. These proceedings are initiated by this City
Council pursuant to the authorization of Section 53318 of the Government Code of the State of
California and the other provisions of the Act.
Section 3. Boundaries of CFD No. 2022-02. It is the intention of this City Council to
establish CFD No. 2022-02 pursuant to the provisions of the Act, and to determine the boundaries
Attachment 3
Page 139
Resolution No. 2022-041 - Page 2 of 5
and parcels on which the special tax may be levied to finance the Authorized Services (defined
in Section 5 below). A description of the boundaries of the territory proposed for inclusion in CFD
No. 2022-02 including properties and parcels of land proposed to be subject to the levy of the
special tax by CFD No. 2022-02 is as follows:
All that property as shown on the Boundary Map designated as
"Proposed Boundaries of Community Facilities District No. 2022-02
(Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
County of San Bernardino, State of California" a copy of which is on
file in the Office of the City Clerk and shall remain open for public
inspection.
Said map is approved and, pursuant to Section 3110 of the California Streets and
Highways Code, the City Clerk shall, after conforming with the other requirements of Section 3111
of said Code, record the original of said map, and not later than fifteen (15) days prior to the date
of the public hearing set forth in Section 7 hereof shall file a copy of said map with the County
Recorder of the County of San Bernardino.
Section 4. Name of the Community Facilities District. The name of the Community
Facilities District proposed to be established shall be known and designated as "Community
Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
County of San Bernardino, State of California."
Section 5. Descriptions of Services and Determination of Necessity. It is the
intention of this City Council to finance certain industrial services which are more particularly
described is in Exhibit A (the "Authorized Services") attached hereto and incorporated herein by
this reference.
The City Council finds that the Authorized Services described in this Section 5 hereof are
necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the City as a result of new development
occurring within the boundaries of the proposed CFD No. 2022-02.
Section 6. Special Tax. It is hereby further proposed that, except where funds are
otherwise available, a special tax sufficient to finance the Authorized Services (the "Special Tax")
and related incidental expenses authorized by the Act, secured by recordation of a continuing lien
against all non-exempt real property in CFD No. 2022-02, will be levied annually within the
boundaries of such CFD No. 2022-02. For further particulars as to the rates and method of
apportionment of the proposed Special Tax, reference is made to the attached and incorporated
Exhibit B (the "Rates and Method"), which sets forth in sufficient detail the rate and method of
apportionment of the Special Tax to allow each landowner or resident within proposed CFD No.
2022-02 to clearly estimate the maximum amount of Special Tax that such person will have to
pay for the Authorized Services. The Special Tax may not be prepaid.
The Special Tax herein authorized, to the extent possible, shall be collected in the same
manner as ad valorem property taxes or in such other manner as this City Council or its designee
shall determine, including direct billing of the affected property owners. Such Special Tax shall be
subject to the same penalties, procedure, sale and lien priority in any case of delinquency as
applicable for ad valorem taxes. Any Special Tax that may not be collected on the County tax roll
shall be collected through a direct billing procedure by the City.
Page 140
Resolution No. 2022-041 - Page 3 of 5
Pursuant to Government Code Section 53340 and except as provided in Government
Code Section 53317.3, properties of entities of the state, federal, and local governments shall be
exempt from the levy of the Special Tax.
Section 7. Public Hearing. NOTICE IS GIVEN THAT ON JUNE 1, 2022 AT 7:00 PM,
IN THE REGULAR MEETING PLACE OF THE CITY COUNCIL BEING 10500 CIVIC CENTER
DRIVE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, 91730 OR VIA TELECONFERENCE AS
DIRECTED BY THE CITY DUE TO COVID-19 SOCIAL DISTANCING GUIDELINES, A PUBLIC
HEARING WILL BE HELD WHERE THIS CITY COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PROPOSED CFD NO. 2022-02, THE PROPOSED METHOD AND
APPORTIONMENT OF THE SPECIAL TAX, AND ALL OTHER MATTERS AS SET FORTH IN
THIS RESOLUTION OF INTENTION. AT THE ABOVE-MENTIONED TIME AND PLACE FOR
PUBLIC HEARING ANY INTERESTED PERSONS, INCLUDING TAXPAYERS AND PROPERTY
OWNERS MAY APPEAR AND BE HEARD. THE TESTIMONY OF ALL INTERESTED PERSONS
FOR OR AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT, THE
EXTENT OF THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT, OR THE FINANCING OF
AUTHORIZED SERVICES, WILL BE HEARD AND CONSIDERED. ANY PROTESTS MAY BE
MADE ORALLY OR IN WRITING. HOWEVER, ANY PROTESTS PERTAINING TO THE
REGULARITY OR SUFFICIENCY OF THE PROCEEDINGS SHALL BE IN WRITING AND
CLEARLY SET FORTH THE IRREGULARITIES AND DEFECTS TO WHICH THE OBJECTION
IS MADE. ALL WRITTEN PROTESTS SHALL BE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK ON OR
BEFORE THE TIME FIXED FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. WRITTEN PROTESTS MAY BE
WITHDRAWN IN WRITING AT ANY TIME BEFORE THE CONCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
HEARING.
IF A WRITTEN MAJORITY PROTEST AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CFD NO.
2022-02 IS FILED, THE PROCEEDINGS SHALL BE ABANDONED. IF SUCH MAJORITY
PROTEST IS LIMITED TO CERTAIN AUTHORIZED SERVICES, THOSE SERVICES SHALL BE
ELIMINATED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
Section 8. Election. If, following the public hearing described in the Section above,
the City Council determines to establish CFD No. 2022-02 and proposes to levy the Special Tax
within CFD No. 2022-02, the City Council shall then submit the levy of the Special Tax to the
qualified electors of CFD No. 2022-02. If at least twelve (12) persons, who need not necessarily
be the same 12 persons, have been registered to vote within CFD No. 2022-02 for each of the
ninety (90) days preceding the close of the public hearing, the vote shall be by registered voters
of CFD No. 2022-02, with each voter having one (1) vote. Otherwise, the vote shall be by the
landowners of CFD No. 2022-02 who were the owners of record at the close of the subject
hearing, with each landowner or the authorized representative thereof, having one (1) vote for
each acre or portion of an acre of land owned within CFD No. 2022-02.
A successful election relating to the Special Tax authorization shall, as applicable,
establish the appropriations limit as authorized by Article XIIIB of the California Constitution as it
is applicable to CFD No. 2022-02.
Section 9. Notice of Public Hearing. Notice of the time and place of the public
hearing shall be given by the City Clerk by causing the publication of a Notice of Public Hearing
in the legally designated newspaper of general circulation, such publication pursuant to Section
6061 of the Government Code, with such publication to be completed at least seven (7) days prior
to the date set for the public hearing.
Page 141
Resolution No. 2022-041 - Page 4 of 5
Section 10. Report. The City Manager, as the officer of the City who will be responsible
for providing the Authorized Services to be provided within and financed by CFD No. 2022-02, if
established, shall study or cause CFD No. 2022-02 to be studied, and, at or before the time of the
public hearing as described in Section 7, file a report or cause a report to be filed with the City
Council containing a brief description of the Authorized Services which will in his opinion be
required to adequately meet the needs of CFD No. 2022-02, and his or her estimate of the fair
and reasonable cost of providing such services, and the incidental expenses to be incurred in
connection therewith. Such report shall be made a part of the record of the hearing to be held
pursuant to Section 7 hereof.
Section 11. Advances of Funds or Work In-Kind. At any time either before or after
the formation of CFD No. 2022-02, the City Council may accept advances of funds or work-in-
kind from any source, including, but not limited to, private persons or private entities and may
provide, by resolution, for the use of those funds or that work-in-kind for any authorized purpose,
including, but not limited to, paying any cost incurred by the City in creating CFD No. 2022-02.
The City may enter into an agreement, by resolution, with the person or entity advancing the funds
or work-in-kind, to repay all or a portion of the funds so advanced, or to reimburse the person or
entity for the value, or cost, whichever is less, of the work-in-kind, as determined by the City
Council. No such agreement shall constitute a debt or liability of the City.
Page 142
Resolution No. 2022-041 - Page 5 of 5
Section 12. Effective Date. This resolution shall become effective upon its adoption.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular
Meeting thereof held this 20th day of April, 2022, by the following roll call vote to wit:
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 20 day of April, 2022.
__________________________________
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) ss
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA )
I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular Meeting of said City Council held on
the 20th day of April, 2022.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
Executed this 21st day of April, 2022, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
Page 143
A-1
EXHIBIT A
DESCRIPTION OF AUTHORIZED SERVICES
The City may finance any services which may be funded with proceeds of the
special tax of CFD No. 2022-02, authorized pursuant to Section 53313 of the Act,
including but not limited to all costs attributed to maintaining and servicing landscape and
tree maintenance, storm drain repair and maintenance, streets and roadway services,
police safety calls and service, and creating a capital reserve account for any future
industrial repairs and maintenance.
In addition to payment of the cost and expense of the forgoing services, proceeds
of the special tax may be expended to pay "Administrative Expenses" as said term is
defined in the Rate and Method.
Page 144
Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 1
B-1
EXHIBIT B
RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT
FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2022-02
(INDUSTRIAL AREA SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
A Special Tax, as hereinafter defined, shall be levied and collected Community Facilities District No. 2022-
02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“CFD No. 2022-02”) each Fiscal Year
commencing in Fiscal Year 2022/23, in an amount determined by the application of the procedures below.
All Taxable Property, as hereinafter defined, unless exempted by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be
taxed for the purposes, to the extent and in the manner herein provided.
A. DEFINITIONS
The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meaning:
“Accessory Dwelling Unit” or “ADU” means a secondary residential unit of limited size, as defined
in California Government Code Section 65852.2, as may be amended from time to time, that is
accessory to a single-unit dwelling. The ADU may be on the same Assessor’s Parcel as the single-
unit dwelling or on a separate Assessor’s Parcel. For purposes of clarification, where an ADU and
primary Unit are on the same Assessor’s Parcel, the ADU located on such Assessor’s Parcel is
considered a separate Unit from the primary Unit on such Assessor’s Parcel for purposes of the
Special Tax. Should an Assessor’s Parcel contain only an ADU, such Assessor’s Parcel will be taxed
as an ADU only.
“Acre or Acreage” means the land area of an Assessor’s Parcel as shown on an Assessor’s Parcel
Map or in the Assessor’s Data for each Assessor’s Parcel. In the event that the Assessor’s Parcel Map
or Assessor’s Data shows no acreage, the Acreage for any Assessor’s Parcel may be determined by
the CFD Administrator based upon the applicable condominium plan, final map, parcel map or
calculated using available spatial data and GIS.
“Act” means the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, being Chapter 2.5 of
Part 1, Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State.
“Administrative Expenses” means the actual or reasonably estimated costs directly related to the
administration of CFD No. 2022-02 including, but not limited to, the following: the costs of
computing the Annual Special Tax Requirement and the annual Special Tax and of preparing the
annual Special Tax collection schedules; the costs of collecting the Special Tax, including any charges
levied by the County Auditor’s Office, Tax Collector’s Office or Treasurer’s Office; the costs of the
City or designee in complying with the disclosure requirements of the California Government Code
(including the Act), including public inquiries regarding the Special Tax; the costs of the City or
designee related to an appeal of the Special Tax; and the costs of commencing and pursuing to
completion any action arising from any delinquent Special Tax in CFD No. 2022-02. Administrative
Expenses shall also include amounts estimated or advanced by the City or CFD No. 2022-02 for any
other administrative purposes, including, but not limited to, attorney’s fees.
Page 145
Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2
B-2
“Annual Services Costs” means the amounts required to fund services authorized to be funded by
CFD No. 2022-02.
“Annual Special Tax Requirement” means that amount with respect to CFD No. 2022-02
determined by the City Council or designee as required in any Fiscal Year to pay: (1) the
Administrative Expenses, (2) the Annual Services Costs, (3) any amount required to establish or
replenish any reserve or replacement fund established in connection with CFD No. 2022-02, and (4)
any reasonably anticipated delinquent Special Tax based on the delinquency rate for any Special Tax
levied in the previous Fiscal Year.
“Assessor’s Data” means Units, Acreage, or other information contained in the records of the
County Assessor for each Assessor’s Parcel.
“Assessor’s Parcel” or “Parcel” means a lot or parcel shown in an Assessor’s Parcel Map with an
assigned Assessor’s Parcel Number.
“Assessor’s Parcel Map” means an official map of the Assessor of the County designating parcels
by Assessor’s Parcel Number.
“Assessor’s Parcel Number” means, with respect to an Assessor’s Parcel, that number assigned to
such Assessment’s Parcel by the County Assessor for purposes of identification.
“Boundary Map” means that map recorded with the County recorder’s office on _______ in Book
__ at Page __ as Document Number _____.
“CFD Administrator” means an official of the City, or designee thereof, responsible for determining
the Annual Special Tax Requirement and providing for the levy and collection of the Special Taxes.
“CFD No. 2022-02” means Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
“City” means the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
“City Council” means the City Council of the City, acting as the legislative body of CFD No. 2022-02.
“County” means the County of San Bernardino, California.
“County Assessor” means the County Assessor of the County.
“Developed Property” means, in any Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property in CFD No. 2022-02 for which
a building permit for new construction was issued by the City prior to April 1 of the preceding Fiscal
Year.
“Exempt Property” means all Assessors’ Parcels within the boundary of CFD No. 2022-02 which are
exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to Section E.
“Fiscal Year” means the period starting July 1 and ending on the following June 30.
“GIS” means a geographic information system.
“Industrial Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property for which a building
permit has been issued for an industrial use.
Page 146
Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3
B-3
“Maximum Special Tax” means the maximum Special Tax authorized for levy in any Fiscal Year that
may apply to Taxable Property as described in Section C.
“Mixed Use Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels that have been classified by the City to allow
multiple uses on each such Assessor’s Parcel.
“Open Space Property” means property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2022-02 which (i) has
been designated with specific boundaries and Acreage on a final subdivision map as open space, (ii)
is classified by the County Assessor as open space, (iii) has been irrevocably offered for dedication
as open space to the federal government, the State, the County, the City, or any other public agency,
or (iv) is encumbered by an easement or other restriction required by the City limiting the use of
such property to open space.
“Property Owner’s Association” means any property owner’s association. As used in this
definition, a Property Owner’s Association includes any home-owner’s association, condominium
owner’s association, master or sub-association or non-residential owner’s association.
“Property Owner’s Association Property” means any property within the boundaries of CFD No.
2022-02 which is (a) owned by a Property Owner’s Association or (b) designated with specific
boundaries and acreage on a final subdivision map as property owner association property.
“Proportionately” means for Developed Property and Undeveloped Property, that the ratio of the
Special Tax levy to the Maximum Annual Special Tax is equal within each respective Tax Zone.
“Public Property” means any property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2022-02 which (i) is owned
by a public agency, (ii) has been irrevocably offered for dedication to a public agency, or (iii) is
designated with specific boundaries and Acreage on a final subdivision map as property which will
be owned by a public agency. For purposes of this definition, a public agency includes the federal
government, the State, the County, the City, school districts, or any other public agency.
“Rate and Method of Apportionment” means this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special
Tax for CFD No. 2022-02.
“Special Tax” means the annual special tax to be levied in each Fiscal Year on each Assessor’s Parcel
of Taxable Property to fund the Annual Special Tax Requirement.
“State” means the State of California.
“Tax Escalation Factor” means on July 1 of each Fiscal Year, commencing on July 1, 2023, the
Maximum Special Tax as shown in Section C shall be increased by a minimum of two percent (2%)
to a maximum of six percent (6%), determined on an annual basis as needed to satisfy the Special
Tax Requirement.
“Tax Zone” means a mutually exclusive geographic area within which the Special Tax may be levied
pursuant to this Rate and Method of Apportionment. All the Taxable Property within CFD No. 2022-
02 at the time of its formation is within Tax Zone No. 1. Additional Tax Zones may be created when
property is annexed to CFD No. 2022-02, and a separate Maximum Special Tax shall be identified
for property within each new Tax Zone at the time of such annexation. The Assessor’s Parcels
Page 147
Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 4
B-4
included within a new Tax Zone when such Parcels are annexed to CFD No. 2022-02 shall be
identified by Assessor’s Parcel number in the annexation documents at the time of annexation.
“Taxable Property” means all the Assessor’s Parcels within the boundaries of CFD No. 2022-02 that
are not exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to law or Section E below.
“Undeveloped Property” means all the Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property within the
boundaries of CFD No. 2022-02 that are not Developed Property.
“Welfare Exempt Property” means, in any Fiscal Year, all Parcels within the boundaries of CFD No.
2022-02 that have been granted a welfare exemption by the County under subdivision (g) of
Section 214 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
B. DETERMINATION OF TAXABLE PARCELS
On, or about, July 1 of each Fiscal Year, the CFD Administrator shall determine the valid Assessor’s
Parcel Numbers for all Taxable Property within CFD No. 2022-02. If any Assessor’s Parcel Numbers
are no longer valid, the CFD Administrator shall determine the new Assessor’s Parcel Number or
Numbers in effect for the then-current Fiscal Year. To the extent a Parcel or Parcels of Taxable
Property are subdivided, consolidated, or otherwise reconfigured, the Maximum Special Tax shall
be assigned to the new Assessor’s Parcels Numbers pursuant to Section C. The CFD Administrator
shall also determine: (i) the Tax Zone within which each Parcel is located; (ii) which Parcels are
Developed Property and Undeveloped Property; (iii) the number of Units or Acreage each Parcel
contains; (iv) the property type, i.e., Industrial Property, Mixed-Use Property, etc.; and (v) the
Annual Special Tax Requirement for the Fiscal Year.
C. MAXIMUM ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX RATE
The Maximum Special Tax for each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property within Tax Zone No. 1 shall
be assigned according to the table on the following page.
Tax Zone No. 1
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Industrial Property $5,852.00 per Acre
Mixed Use Property $12,030.00 per Acre
Accessory Dwelling Units $731.50 per ADU
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
On July 1 of each Fiscal Year, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax for Tax Zone
No. 1 shall be increased by an amount equal to the Tax Escalation Factor.
A different Maximum Special Tax rate and Tax Escalation Factor may be identified in Tax Zones
added to CFD No. 2022-02 as a result of future annexations.
Page 148
Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 5
B-5
D. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF THE SPECIAL TAX
All Taxable Property shall be subject to a Special Tax defined as follows.
The Special Tax shall be levied each Fiscal Year by the CFD Administrator. The Annual Special Tax
Requirement shall be apportioned to each Parcel within CFD No. 2022-02 by the method shown
below.
First: Determine the Annual Special Tax Requirement.
Second: Levy the Special Tax on each Parcel of Developed Property and Undeveloped Property,
Proportionately, up to the applicable Maximum Special Tax.
Under no circumstances will the Special Tax on any Assessor’s Parcel used for private residential
purposes be increased by more than 10% as a consequence of delinquency or default by the owner
of any other Assessor’s Parcel within CFD No. 2022-02.
E. EXEMPTIONS
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax, no
Special Tax shall be levied on Property Owner’s Association Property, Assessor’s Parcels with public
or utility easements making impractical their utilization for any use other than the purposes set
forth in the easement, or Public Property, except as otherwise provided in Sections 53317.3,
53317.5, and 53340.1 of the Act.
Welfare Exempt Property shall be exempt from the Special Tax in each Fiscal Year the property
qualifies as Welfare Exempt Property.
F. APPEAL OF SPECIAL TAX LEVY
Any property owner may file a written appeal of the Special Tax with the CFD Administrator claiming
that the amount or application of the Special Tax is not correct. The appeal must be filed not later
than one calendar year after having paid the Special Tax that is disputed, and the appellant must be
current in all payments of the Special Tax. In addition, during the term of the appeal process, all
Special Tax levied must be paid on or before the payment date established when the levy was made.
The appeal must specify the reasons why the appellant claims the Special Tax is in error. The CFD
Administrator shall review the appeal, meet with the appellant if the CFD Administrator deems
necessary, and advise the appellant of its determination.
If the property owner disagrees with the CFD Administrator’s decision relative to the appeal, the
owner may then file a written appeal with the City Council whose subsequent decision shall be final
and binding on all interested parties. If the decision of the CFD Administrator or subsequent decision
by the City Council requires the Special Tax to be modified or changed in favor of the property
owner, the CFD Administrator shall determine if sufficient Special Tax revenue is available to make
Page 149
Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 6
B-6
a cash refund. If a cash refund cannot be made, then an adjustment shall be made to credit future
Special Taxes.
This procedure shall be exclusive and its exhaustion by any property owner shall be a condition
precedent to filing any legal action by such owner.
G. INTERPRETATION OF RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT
The City Council may, by resolution or ordinance, interpret, clarify and/or revise this Rate and
Method of Apportionment to correct any inconsistency, vagueness, or ambiguity as it relates to the
Special Taxes, method of apportionment, classification of Assessor’s Parcels, or any definition used
herein, as long as such correction does not materially affect the levy and collection of Special Taxes.
In addition, the interpretation and application of any section of this document shall be at the City’s
discretion.
H. MANNER AND DURATION OF SPECIAL TAX
The Special Tax shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem
property taxes, provided that the City may directly bill the Special Tax, may collect the Special Tax
at a different time or in a different manner if needed to meet the financial obligations of CFD No.
2022-02, and may collect delinquent Special Taxes through available methods.
A Special Tax shall be levied commencing in Fiscal Year 2022/23 to the extent necessary to satisfy
the Annual Special Tax Requirement and shall be levied for as long as required to satisfy the Annual
Special Tax Requirement.
I. PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
The Special Tax may not be prepaid.
Page 150
Resolution No. 2022-042 - Page 1 of 4
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-042
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING
INTENTION TO ANNEX TERRITORY IN THE FUTURE TO
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2022-02 (INDUSTRIAL
AREA SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the "City") desires to provide the
authorization to annex territory in the future to a community facilities district pursuant to the terms
and provisions of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982," being Chapter 2.5, Part 1,
Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the "Act"), and specifically
Article 3.5 thereof. The community facilities district has been designated as Community Facilities
District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga ("CFD No. 2022-
02"); and,
WHEREAS, it is determined to be within the public interest and convenience to establish
a procedure to allow and provide for future annexations to CFD No. 2022-02 and further to specify
the amount of special tax that would be levied and set forth the terms and conditions for
certification of any annexation in the future; and,
WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be annexed in the future shall be known and
designated as Future Annexation Area Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (the "Future
Annexation Area"), and a map designated as "Proposed Boundaries of the Future Annexation
Area of Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California" showing the territory proposed to be
annexed in the future is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and shall be kept with the transcript
of these proceedings.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, California, as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct.
Section 2. Authorization. These proceedings for future annexations are authorized
and initiated by this legislative body pursuant to the authorization of the Act and specifically
Section 53339.2 of the Government Code of the State of California.
Section 3. Public Convenience and Necessity. This City Council hereby
determines that the public convenience and necessity requires a procedure to allow and authorize
territory to be annexed in the future to CFD No. 2022-02 in order to finance the costs and
expenses for the authorized services
Section 4. Boundaries of CFD No. 2022-02 and Territory Proposed to be Annexed
in the Future. A general description of the territory included in CFD No. 2022-02 is hereinafter
described as follows:
All that property and territory as previously included within CFD No.
2022-02, as said property was shown on a map designated as
"Proposed Boundaries of Community Facilities District No. 2022-02
(Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
Attachment 4
Page 151
Resolution No. 2022-042 - Page 2 of 4
2
3
2
0
County of San Bernardino, State of California," a copy of which is
on file in the Office of the City Clerk and shall remain open for public
inspection.
A description of the boundaries and territory proposed to be annexed in the future is as follows:
All that property and territory proposed to be annexed in the future
to CFD No. 2022-02, as said property is shown on the map
designated as “Proposed Boundaries of the Future Annexation
Area of Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area
Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San
Bernardino, State of California,” a copy of which is on file in the
Office of the City Clerk and shall remain open for public inspection.
Future annexation proceedings may only be completed with the unanimous consent of the
owner or owners of any parcel proposed for annexation.
Section 5. Name of CFD No. 2022-02 and Future Annexation Area. The name of
CFD No. 2022-02 is “Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California”, and the designation
for the Future Annexation Area shall be Future Annexation Area, Community Facilities District No.
2022-02 (Industrial Area Services).
Section 6. Authorized Services. The types of services to be financed from the levy
of the special tax in CFD No. 2022-02, including the Future Annexation Area, are those described
in Exhibit A hereto which is incorporated herein by this reference ("Authorized Services").
The Authorized Services to be financed by the levy of special taxes to be levied on specific
territory within the Future Annexation Area to be annexed to CFD No. 2022-02 may include some
or all of such Authorized Services or may include alternatives to the Authorized Services.
The Authorized Services shall to the maximum extent practicable, taking into account
budgetary and operational demands of the City, be provided in common within CFD No. 2022-02
and the Future Annexation Area.
The City Council finds that the Authorized Services described in this Section 6 hereof are
necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the City as a result of new development
occurring within the boundaries of CFD No. 2022-02 and the Future Annexation Area.
Section 7. Special Tax. It is hereby further proposed that, except where funds are
otherwise available, a special tax sufficient to finance the Authorized Services (the “Special Tax”)
to be provided in the territory of the Future Annexation Area upon the annexation of such territory
to CFD No. 2022-02 and related incidental expenses authorized by the Act, secured by
recordation of a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property in the Future Annexation
Area that annexes to CFD No. 2022-02, will be levied annually within the boundaries of the
territory within the Future Annexation Area upon the annexation of such territory to CFD No. 2022-
02. For further particulars as to the rates and method of apportionment of the proposed Special
Tax, reference is made to the attached and incorporated Exhibit B (the “Rates and Method”),
which sets forth in sufficient detail the rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax to
allow each landowner or resident within the territory in proposed Future Annexation Area to clearly
estimate the maximum amount of the Special Tax that such person will have to pay for the
Page 152
Resolution No. 2022-042 - Page 3 of 4
2
3
2
0
Authorized Services upon the annexation of such territory to CFD No. 2022-02. The Special Tax
may not be prepaid.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the actual cost of providing Authorized Services to
territory within any territory within the proposed Future Annexation Area is higher or lower than
the cost of providing such services within the existing Community Facilities District, a higher or
lower special tax may be levied within such territory subject to the unanimous approval and
election of the owner or owners of such territory. In any such circumstance, the Rate and Method
may be revised to reflect the higher or lower special tax, as applicable.
The Special Tax herein authorized, to the extent possible, shall be collected in the same
manner as ad valorem property taxes or in such other manner as this City Council or its designee
shall determine, including direct billing of the affected property owners. Such Special Tax shall
be subject to the same penalties, procedure, sale and lien priority in any case of delinquency as
applicable for ad valorem taxes. Any Special Tax that may not be collected on the County tax roll
shall be collected through a direct billing procedure by the City.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 53340 and except as provided in Government
Code Section 53317.3, properties of entities of the state, federal, and local governments shall be
exempt from the levy of the Special Tax.
Section 8. Effective Date of Future Annexation. Annexation of territory in the future
shall be effective upon the unanimous approval and election of the owner or owners of any such
parcel authorizing the levy of the Special Tax upon such parcel following the annexation of such
parcel to CFD No. 2022-02, and no further public hearings or additional proceedings will be
required to accomplish such annexation.
Section 9. Public Hearing. NOTICE IS GIVEN THAT ON JUNE 1, 2022 at 7:00 PM,
IN THE REGULAR MEETING PLACE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF BEING 10500 CIVIC
CENTER DRIVE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA OR VIA TELECONFERENCE AS
DIRECTED BY THE CITY DUE TO COVID-19 SOCIAL DISTANCING GUIDELINES, A PUBLIC
HEARING WILL BE HELD WHERE THIS CITY COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER THE ANNEXATION
OF CERTAIN TERRITORY IN THE FUTURE TO THE CFD NO. 2022-02, THE PROPOSED
METHOD AND APPORTIONMENT OF THE SPECIAL TAX TO BE LEVIED WITHIN SAID
PROPOSED FUTURE ANNEXATION AREA AND ALL OTHER MATTERS AS SET FORTH IN
THIS RESOLUTION OF INTENTION. ANY INTERESTED PERSONS MAY APPEAR AND BE
HEARD, AND WRITTEN PROTESTS SHALL BE FILED ON OR BEFORE THE TIME FIXED FOR
THE PUBLIC HEARING.
Section 10. Notice. Notice of the time and place of the public hearing shall be given
by the City Clerk by causing the publication of a Notice of Public Hearing in the legally designated
newspaper of general circulation, such publication pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government
Code, with such publication to be completed at least seven (7) days prior to the date set for the
public hearing.
[Remainder of this page intentionally left blank.]
Page 153
Resolution No. 2022-042 - Page 4 of 4
2
3
2
0
Section 11. Effective Date. This resolution shall become effective upon its adoption.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular
Meeting thereof held this 20th day of April, 2022, by the following roll call vote to wit:
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 20 day of April, 2022.
__________________________________
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) ss
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA )
I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular Meeting of said City Council held on
the 20th day of April, 2022.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
Executed this 21st day of April, 2022, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
Page 154
A-1
EXHIBIT A
DESCRIPTION OF AUTHORIZED SERVICES
The City may finance any services which may be funded with proceeds of the special tax
of CFD No. 2022-02, authorized pursuant to Section 53313 of the Act, including but not limited to
all costs attributed to maintaining and servicing landscape and tree maintenance, storm drain
repair and maintenance, streets and roadway services, police safety calls and service, and
creating a capital reserve account for any future industrial repairs and maintenance.
In addition to payment of the cost and expense of the forgoing services, proceeds of the
special tax may be expended to pay “Administrative Expenses” as said term is defined in the Rate
and Method.
Page 155
Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 1
B-1
EXHIBIT B
RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT
FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2022-02
(INDUSTRIAL AREA SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
A Special Tax, as hereinafter defined, shall be levied and collected Community Facilities District No. 2022-
02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“CFD No. 2022-02”) each Fiscal Year
commencing in Fiscal Year 2022/23, in an amount determined by the application of the procedures below.
All Taxable Property, as hereinafter defined, unless exempted by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be
taxed for the purposes, to the extent and in the manner herein provided.
A. DEFINITIONS
The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meaning:
“Accessory Dwelling Unit” or “ADU” means a secondary residential unit of limited size, as defined
in California Government Code Section 65852.2, as may be amended from time to time, that is
accessory to a single-unit dwelling. The ADU may be on the same Assessor’s Parcel as the single-
unit dwelling or on a separate Assessor’s Parcel. For purposes of clarification, where an ADU and
primary Unit are on the same Assessor’s Parcel, the ADU located on such Assessor’s Parcel is
considered a separate Unit from the primary Unit on such Assessor’s Parcel for purposes of the
Special Tax. Should an Assessor’s Parcel contain only an ADU, such Assessor’s Parcel will be taxed
as an ADU only.
“Acre or Acreage” means the land area of an Assessor’s Parcel as shown on an Assessor’s Parcel
Map or in the Assessor’s Data for each Assessor’s Parcel. In the event that the Assessor’s Parcel Map
or Assessor’s Data shows no acreage, the Acreage for any Assessor’s Parcel may be determined by
the CFD Administrator based upon the applicable condominium plan, final map, parcel map or
calculated using available spatial data and GIS.
“Act” means the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, being Chapter 2.5 of
Part 1, Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State.
“Administrative Expenses” means the actual or reasonably estimated costs directly related to the
administration of CFD No. 2022-02 including, but not limited to, the following: the costs of
computing the Annual Special Tax Requirement and the annual Special Tax and of preparing the
annual Special Tax collection schedules; the costs of collecting the Special Tax, including any charges
levied by the County Auditor’s Office, Tax Collector’s Office or Treasurer’s Office; the costs of the
City or designee in complying with the disclosure requirements of the California Government Code
(including the Act), including public inquiries regarding the Special Tax; the costs of the City or
designee related to an appeal of the Special Tax; and the costs of commencing and pursuing to
completion any action arising from any delinquent Special Tax in CFD No. 2022-02. Administrative
Expenses shall also include amounts estimated or advanced by the City or CFD No. 2022-02 for any
other administrative purposes, including, but not limited to, attorney’s fees.
Page 156
Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2
B-2
“Annual Services Costs” means the amounts required to fund services authorized to be funded by
CFD No. 2022-02.
“Annual Special Tax Requirement” means that amount with respect to CFD No. 2022-02
determined by the City Council or designee as required in any Fiscal Year to pay: (1) the
Administrative Expenses, (2) the Annual Services Costs, (3) any amount required to establish or
replenish any reserve or replacement fund established in connection with CFD No. 2022-02, and (4)
any reasonably anticipated delinquent Special Tax based on the delinquency rate for any Special Tax
levied in the previous Fiscal Year.
“Assessor’s Data” means Units, Acreage, or other information contained in the records of the
County Assessor for each Assessor’s Parcel.
“Assessor’s Parcel” or “Parcel” means a lot or parcel shown in an Assessor’s Parcel Map with an
assigned Assessor’s Parcel Number.
“Assessor’s Parcel Map” means an official map of the Assessor of the County designating parcels
by Assessor’s Parcel Number.
“Assessor’s Parcel Number” means, with respect to an Assessor’s Parcel, that number assigned to
such Assessment’s Parcel by the County Assessor for purposes of identification.
“Boundary Map” means that map recorded with the County recorder’s office on _______ in Book
__ at Page __ as Document Number _____.
“CFD Administrator” means an official of the City, or designee thereof, responsible for determining
the Annual Special Tax Requirement and providing for the levy and collection of the Special Taxes.
“CFD No. 2022-02” means Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
“City” means the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
“City Council” means the City Council of the City, acting as the legislative body of CFD No. 2022-02.
“County” means the County of San Bernardino, California.
“County Assessor” means the County Assessor of the County.
“Developed Property” means, in any Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property in CFD No. 2022-02 for which
a building permit for new construction was issued by the City prior to April 1 of the preceding Fiscal
Year.
“Exempt Property” means all Assessors’ Parcels within the boundary of CFD No. 2022-02 which are
exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to Section E.
“Fiscal Year” means the period starting July 1 and ending on the following June 30.
“GIS” means a geographic information system.
“Industrial Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property for which a building
permit has been issued for an industrial use.
Page 157
Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3
B-3
“Maximum Special Tax” means the maximum Special Tax authorized for levy in any Fiscal Year that
may apply to Taxable Property as described in Section C.
“Mixed Use Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels that have been classified by the City to allow
multiple uses on each such Assessor’s Parcel.
“Open Space Property” means property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2022-02 which (i) has
been designated with specific boundaries and Acreage on a final subdivision map as open space, (ii)
is classified by the County Assessor as open space, (iii) has been irrevocably offered for dedication
as open space to the federal government, the State, the County, the City, or any other public agency,
or (iv) is encumbered by an easement or other restriction required by the City limiting the use of
such property to open space.
“Property Owner’s Association” means any property owner’s association. As used in this
definition, a Property Owner’s Association includes any home-owner’s association, condominium
owner’s association, master or sub-association or non-residential owner’s association.
“Property Owner’s Association Property” means any property within the boundaries of CFD No.
2022-02 which is (a) owned by a Property Owner’s Association or (b) designated with specific
boundaries and acreage on a final subdivision map as property owner association property.
“Proportionately” means for Developed Property and Undeveloped Property, that the ratio of the
Special Tax levy to the Maximum Annual Special Tax is equal within each respective Tax Zone.
“Public Property” means any property within the boundaries of CFD No. 2022-02 which (i) is owned
by a public agency, (ii) has been irrevocably offered for dedication to a public agency, or (iii) is
designated with specific boundaries and Acreage on a final subdivision map as property which will
be owned by a public agency. For purposes of this definition, a public agency includes the federal
government, the State, the County, the City, school districts, or any other public agency.
“Rate and Method of Apportionment” means this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special
Tax for CFD No. 2022-02.
“Special Tax” means the annual special tax to be levied in each Fiscal Year on each Assessor’s Parcel
of Taxable Property to fund the Annual Special Tax Requirement.
“State” means the State of California.
“Tax Escalation Factor” means on July 1 of each Fiscal Year, commencing on July 1, 2023, the
Maximum Special Tax as shown in Section C shall be increased by a minimum of two percent (2%)
to a maximum of six percent (6%), determined on an annual basis as needed to satisfy the Special
Tax Requirement.
“Tax Zone” means a mutually exclusive geographic area within which the Special Tax may be levied
pursuant to this Rate and Method of Apportionment. All the Taxable Property within CFD No. 2022-
02 at the time of its formation is within Tax Zone No. 1. Additional Tax Zones may be created when
property is annexed to CFD No. 2022-02, and a separate Maximum Special Tax shall be identified
for property within each new Tax Zone at the time of such annexation. The Assessor’s Parcels
Page 158
Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 4
B-4
included within a new Tax Zone when such Parcels are annexed to CFD No. 2022-02 shall be
identified by Assessor’s Parcel number in the annexation documents at the time of annexation.
“Taxable Property” means all the Assessor’s Parcels within the boundaries of CFD No. 2022-02 that
are not exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to law or Section E below.
“Undeveloped Property” means all the Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property within the
boundaries of CFD No. 2022-02 that are not Developed Property.
“Welfare Exempt Property” means, in any Fiscal Year, all Parcels within the boundaries of CFD No.
2022-02 that have been granted a welfare exemption by the County under subdivision (g) of
Section 214 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
B. DETERMINATION OF TAXABLE PARCELS
On, or about, July 1 of each Fiscal Year, the CFD Administrator shall determine the valid Assessor’s
Parcel Numbers for all Taxable Property within CFD No. 2022-02. If any Assessor’s Parcel Numbers
are no longer valid, the CFD Administrator shall determine the new Assessor’s Parcel Number or
Numbers in effect for the then-current Fiscal Year. To the extent a Parcel or Parcels of Taxable
Property are subdivided, consolidated, or otherwise reconfigured, the Maximum Special Tax shall
be assigned to the new Assessor’s Parcels Numbers pursuant to Section C. The CFD Administrator
shall also determine: (i) the Tax Zone within which each Parcel is located; (ii) which Parcels are
Developed Property and Undeveloped Property; (iii) the number of Units or Acreage each Parcel
contains; (iv) the property type, i.e., Industrial Property, Mixed-Use Property, etc.; and (v) the
Annual Special Tax Requirement for the Fiscal Year.
C. MAXIMUM ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX RATE
The Maximum Special Tax for each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property within Tax Zone No. 1 shall
be assigned according to the table on the following page.
Tax Zone No. 1
Property Land Use 2022/23 Maximum Special Tax Rate
Industrial Property $5,852.00 per Acre
Mixed Use Property $12,030.00 per Acre
Accessory Dwelling Units $731.50 per ADU
Undeveloped Property $200.00 per Parcel
* On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax Rate shall be
increased by the Tax Escalation Factor.
On July 1 of each Fiscal Year, commencing on July 1, 2023, the Maximum Special Tax for Tax Zone
No. 1 shall be increased by an amount equal to the Tax Escalation Factor.
Page 159
Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 5
B-5
A different Maximum Special Tax rate and Tax Escalation Factor may be identified in Tax Zones
added to CFD No. 2022-02 as a result of future annexations.
D. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF THE SPECIAL TAX
All Taxable Property shall be subject to a Special Tax defined as follows.
The Special Tax shall be levied each Fiscal Year by the CFD Administrator. The Annual Special Tax
Requirement shall be apportioned to each Parcel within CFD No. 2022-02 by the method shown
below.
First: Determine the Annual Special Tax Requirement.
Second: Levy the Special Tax on each Parcel of Developed Property and Undeveloped Property,
Proportionately, up to the applicable Maximum Special Tax.
Under no circumstances will the Special Tax on any Assessor’s Parcel used for private residential
purposes be increased by more than 10% as a consequence of delinquency or default by the owner
of any other Assessor’s Parcel within CFD No. 2022-02.
E. EXEMPTIONS
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax, no
Special Tax shall be levied on Property Owner’s Association Property, Assessor’s Parcels with public
or utility easements making impractical their utilization for any use other than the purposes set
forth in the easement, or Public Property, except as otherwise provided in Sections 53317.3,
53317.5, and 53340.1 of the Act.
Welfare Exempt Property shall be exempt from the Special Tax in each Fiscal Year the property
qualifies as Welfare Exempt Property.
F. APPEAL OF SPECIAL TAX LEVY
Any property owner may file a written appeal of the Special Tax with the CFD Administrator claiming
that the amount or application of the Special Tax is not correct. The appeal must be filed not later
than one calendar year after having paid the Special Tax that is disputed, and the appellant must be
current in all payments of the Special Tax. In addition, during the term of the appeal process, all
Special Tax levied must be paid on or before the payment date established when the levy was made.
The appeal must specify the reasons why the appellant claims the Special Tax is in error. The CFD
Administrator shall review the appeal, meet with the appellant if the CFD Administrator deems
necessary, and advise the appellant of its determination.
If the property owner disagrees with the CFD Administrator’s decision relative to the appeal, the
owner may then file a written appeal with the City Council whose subsequent decision shall be final
and binding on all interested parties. If the decision of the CFD Administrator or subsequent decision
by the City Council requires the Special Tax to be modified or changed in favor of the property
owner, the CFD Administrator shall determine if sufficient Special Tax revenue is available to make
Page 160
Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 6
B-6
a cash refund. If a cash refund cannot be made, then an adjustment shall be made to credit future
Special Taxes.
This procedure shall be exclusive and its exhaustion by any property owner shall be a condition
precedent to filing any legal action by such owner.
G. INTERPRETATION OF RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT
The City Council may, by resolution or ordinance, interpret, clarify and/or revise this Rate and
Method of Apportionment to correct any inconsistency, vagueness, or ambiguity as it relates to the
Special Taxes, method of apportionment, classification of Assessor’s Parcels, or any definition used
herein, as long as such correction does not materially affect the levy and collection of Special Taxes.
In addition, the interpretation and application of any section of this document shall be at the City’s
discretion.
H. MANNER AND DURATION OF SPECIAL TAX
The Special Tax shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem
property taxes, provided that the City may directly bill the Special Tax, may collect the Special Tax
at a different time or in a different manner if needed to meet the financial obligations of CFD No.
2022-02, and may collect delinquent Special Taxes through available methods.
A Special Tax shall be levied commencing in Fiscal Year 2022/23 to the extent necessary to satisfy
the Annual Special Tax Requirement and shall be levied for as long as required to satisfy the Annual
Special Tax Requirement.
I. PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
The Special Tax may not be prepaid.
Page 161
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL ITEM D13 – 4/20/2022 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SLDs vs. CFD 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services)
Below is the table that compares the Street Lighting CFDs to the existing SLD rates. Note, that there are eight tax
zones which overlap the eight SLDs, and these are rates for single family residences (or by acres for SLD 6 for
commercial/industrial development). The rates which increase are because the calculation removes any General
Fund subsidy to true-up the rate. However, all of the zones have an escalator of 2-6% per year based on actual
operations.
Property Land Use Rate Property Land Use Rate
Si ngle -family Home $17.77 Singl e-famil y Home $22.67
Property Land Use Rate Property Land Use Rate
Si ngle -family Home $39.97 Singl e-famil y Home $75.17
Property Land Use Rate Property Land Use Rate
Si ngle -family Home $47.15 Singl e-famil y Home $47.15
Property Land Use Rate Property Land Use Rate
Si ngle -family Home $28.96 Singl e-famil y Home $28.96
Property Land Use Rate Property Land Use Rate
Si ngle -family Home $34.60 Singl e-famil y Home $63.79
Property Land Use Rate Property Land Use Rate
Non-re sidential $51.40 Non-resi de ntial $51.40
Property Land Use Rate Property Land Use Rate
Si ngle -family Home $33.32 Singl e-famil y Home $58.64
Property Land Use Rate Property Land Use Rate
Si ngle -family Home $30.60 Singl e-famil y Home $37.79
SLD 3 Tax Zone 3
SLD 7 Tax Zone 7
SLD 8 Tax Zone 8
SLDs CFD 2022-01
SLD 4 Tax Zone 4
SLD 5 Tax Zone 5
SLD 6 Tax Zone 6
SLD 1 Tax Zone 1
SLD 2 Tax Zone 2
Page 162
DATE:April 20, 2022
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 Resolutions Authorizing Submittal of a Claim to the San
Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) for Transportation
Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Funds for the Cucamonga Creek
Channel Maintenance Project and Haven Avenue Sidewalk Improvement
Project. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2022-037 AND 2022-038) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve resolutions authorizing submittal of a claim to
the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) for Transportation Development
Act (TDA) Article 3 funds for the Cucamonga Creek Channel Maintenance Project and Haven
Avenue Sidewalk Improvement Project.
BACKGROUND:
Every two years SBCTA releases a Call for Projects for their TDA Article 3 Program which
provides that 2 percent of the Local Transportation Funds (LTF) be made available to counties
and cities for the construction or improvement of facilities that provide for the exclusive use of
pedestrians and bicyclists. Each cycle, the City of Rancho Cucamonga applies for various projects
that align with the goals of the grant program and has been awarded funding for various trail and
bus stop enhancement projects since at least 2013.
ANALYSIS:
In 2021, staff submitted two applications for consideration, the Cucamonga Creek Channel
Maintenance Project and the Haven Avenue Sidewalk Improvement Project. Both projects were
selected for funding and will result in a total of up to $311,607 in TDA Article 3 Funds being
distributed to the City on a reimbursement basis.
The Cucamonga Creek Channel Maintenance Project will allow the City to improve a 1.14 mile
long stretch of the existing Class I bike trail on the west side of the Channel from Foothill
Boulevard to Red Hill Country Club Drive and on the east side from the PE Trail to Base Line
Road.
The Haven Avenue Sidewalk Improvement Project will provide for the construction of an 8-foot-
wide sidewalk along the east side of Haven Avenue along Chaffey College from just north of
Banyan Street to Wilson Avenue.
Page 163
Page 2
1
2
3
5
FISCAL IMPACT:
At this time there is no fiscal impact. It should be noted that there is a 35% match associated with
each grant application which will be accounted for and appropriated at the time of construction
contract award for each project.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This project meets City Council core values by promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy
community for all, and by providing for continuous improvement through the construction of high-
quality public improvements.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Resolution No. 2022-037
Attachment 2 - TDA Article 3 Award Claim Form - Cucamonga Creek Channel Maintenance
Project
Attachment 3 - Resolution No. 2022-038
Attachment 4 - TDA Article 3 Award Claim Form - Haven Avenue Sidewalk Improvement Project
Page 164
Resolution No. 2022-037 - Page 1 of 3
2
3
2
1
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-037
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF A CLAIM TO
THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (SBCTA)
FOR TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) ARTICLE 3 FUNDS FOR
THE CUCAMONGA CREEK CHANNEL MAINTENANCE PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Mills-Alquist-Deddeh Act (SB 325) was enacted by the California
Legislature to improve existing public transportation services and encourage regional
transportation coordination. Known as the Transportation Development Act (TDA) of 1971, this
law provides funding to be allocated to transit and non-transit related purposes that comply with
regional transportation plans; and
WHEREAS, TDA provides two funding sources, the Local Transportation Fund (LTF)
and State Transit Assistance fund (STA); and
WHEREAS, LTF is derived from a ¼ cent of the general sales tax collected statewide
and apportioned by population to areas within the county; and
WHEREAS, STA is derived from the statewide sales tax on diesel fuel, plus an
additional vehicle registration fee authorized under Senate Bill 1, referred to as the State of
Good Repair, and both are apportioned by the State Controller’s Office 50% by population and
50% by transit operator revenues; and
WHEREAS, the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) authorizes
funding for a wide variety of transportation programs in San Bernardino County, including
planning and program activities, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, community transit services,
public transportation, and bus and rail projects to local transportation agencies through annual
apportionment and allocation processes, and approves payments periodically throughout the
year; and
WHEREAS, SBCTA awarded the City of Rancho Cucamonga TDA Article 3 grant funds
in the amount of $84,415.00 for development of the Cucamonga Creek Channel Maintenance
Project within the City of Rancho Cucamonga jurisdiction through a competitive “Call for
Projects”; and
WHEREAS, TDA Article 3 grant funds are provided on a reimbursement basis; and
WHEREAS, SBCTA requires the City of Rancho Cucamonga to submit a claim and
request(s) for reimbursement; and
WHEREAS, submittal of the claim for TDA Article 3 funds must be first authorized by the
City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and
WHEREAS, the Cucamonga Creek Channel Maintenance Project award is over
$200,000, and is eligible for progress reimbursement, or under, and eligible for reimbursement
at project completion; and
WHEREAS, SBCTA requires the designation of individuals authorized to certify Project
completion; and
Attachment 1
Page 165
Resolution No. 2022-037 - Page 2 of 3
2
3
2
1
WHEREAS, the City Manager, or their designee, is authorized to certify project
completion, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga authorizes submittal of a claim and request for reimbursement(s) for TDA Article 3
funds for the Cucamonga Creek Channel Maintenance Project in the amount of $84,415.00 and
that the City Council is authorized to certify project completion.
Page 166
Resolution No. 2022-037 - Page 3 of 3
2
3
2
1
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 20 day of April, 2022.
__________________________________
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) ss
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA )
I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular Meeting of said City Council held on
the 20th day of April, 2022.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
Executed this 21st day of April, 2022, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
Nicholas R. Ghirelli, City Attorney
Richards, Watson & Gershon
Page 167
San Bernardino Associated Governments
Claim Form
Article 3 Grant Program
Project Name:Cucamonga Creek Channel Maintenance Grant Allocation No:L22‐0702‐0745‐00
Claimant: City of Rancho Cucamonga
Address:
Attention:
Phone No:
E‐mail Address:
84,415.00$
Purpose: Please check one purpose.
Authorizing Signature:
(Authorized Agent specified in Authorizing Resolution)
Date:
Signature
Type Name & Title
Award Amount
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Approval of this claim and payment by the County Auditor to this claimant are subject to monies being available and
to the provision that such monies will be used only in accordance with the approved allocation instruction.
Transit Stop Access Improvements, PUC 99233.3
Justine Garcia, Deputy Director of Engineering Services
909‐774‐2046
justine.garcia@cityofrc.us
Condition of Approval:
Article 3 Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities, Public Utilities Code (PUC) 99233.3
Art3_RanchoCucamonga_FY21_BikePed_CucaCreekMaint_Claim
Claim Form Page 1
Attachment 2
Page 168
Resolution No. 2022-038 - Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-038
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF A CLAIM TO
THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (SBCTA)
FOR TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) ARTICLE 3 FUNDS FOR
THE HAVEN AVENUE SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Mills-Alquist-Deddeh Act (SB 325) was enacted by the California
Legislature to improve existing public transportation services and encourage regional
transportation coordination. Known as the Transportation Development Act (TDA) of 1971, this
law provides funding to be allocated to transit and non-transit related purposes that comply with
regional transportation plans; and
WHEREAS, TDA provides two funding sources, the Local Transportation Fund (LTF)
and State Transit Assistance fund (STA); and
WHEREAS, LTF is derived from a ¼ cent of the general sales tax collected statewide
and apportioned by population to areas within the county; and
WHEREAS, STA is derived from the statewide sales tax on diesel fuel, plus an
additional vehicle registration fee authorized under Senate Bill 1, referred to as the State of
Good Repair, and both are apportioned by the State Controller’s Office 50% by population and
50% by transit operator revenues; and
WHEREAS, the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) authorizes
funding for a wide variety of transportation programs in San Bernardino County, including
planning and program activities, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, community transit services,
public transportation, and bus and rail projects to local transportation agencies through annual
apportionment and allocation processes, and approves payments periodically throughout the
year; and
WHEREAS, SBCTA awarded the City of Rancho Cucamonga TDA Article 3 grant funds
in the amount of $227,192.00 for development of the Haven Avenue Sidewalk Improvement
Project within the City of Rancho Cucamonga jurisdiction through a competitive “Call for
Projects”; and
WHEREAS, TDA Article 3 grant funds are provided on a reimbursement basis; and
WHEREAS, SBCTA requires the City of Rancho Cucamonga to submit a claim and
request(s) for reimbursement; and
WHEREAS, submittal of the claim for TDA Article 3 funds must be first authorized by the
City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and
WHEREAS, the Haven Avenue Sidewalk Improvement Project award is over $200,000,
and is eligible for progress reimbursement, or under, and eligible for reimbursement at project
completion; and
WHEREAS, SBCTA requires the designation of individuals authorized to certify Project
completion; and
Attachment 3
Page 169
Resolution No. 2022-038 - Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, the City Manager, or their designee, is authorized to certify project
completion, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga authorizes submittal of a claim and request for reimbursement(s) for TDA Article 3
funds for the Haven Avenue Sidewalk Improvement Project in the amount of $227,192.00 and
that the City Council is authorized to certify project completion.
Page 170
Resolution No. 2022-038 - Page 3 of 3
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 20th day of April, 2022.
__________________________________
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) ss
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA )
I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular Meeting of said City Council held on
the 20th day of April, 2022.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
Executed this 21st day of April, 2022, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
Nicholas R. Ghirelli, City Attorney
Richards, Watson & Gershon
Page 171
San Bernardino Associated Governments
Claim Form
Article 3 Grant Program
Project Name:Haven Sidewalk Improvement Grant Allocation No:L22‐0702‐0745‐01
Claimant: City of Rancho Cucamonga
Address:
Attention:
Phone No:
E‐mail Address:
227,192.00$
Purpose: Please check one purpose.
Authorizing Signature:
(Authorized Agent specified in Authorizing Resolution)
Date:
Signature
Type Name & Title
Approval of this claim and payment by the County Auditor to this claimant are subject to monies being available and
to the provision that such monies will be used only in accordance with the approved allocation instruction.
Transit Stop Access Improvements, PUC 99233.3
Justine Garcia, Deputy Director of Engineering Services
909‐774‐2046
justine.garcia@cityofrc.us
Condition of Approval:
Article 3 Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities, Public Utilities Code (PUC) 99233.3
Award Amount
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739
Art3_RanchoCucamonga_FY21_BikePed_HavenSidewalk_Claim
Claim Form Page 1
Attachment 4
Page 172
DATE:April 20, 2022
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Robert Neiuber, Human Resources Director
Lucy Alvarez-Nunez, Management Analyst
SUBJECT:Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Updating the Rancho Cucamonga
Executive Management Group Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 2021-22,
Including a Salary Adjustment to the Planning and Economic
Development Director and Assistant City Manager Classifications, and
updating the Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association Salary
Schedule for Fiscal Year 2021-22, Including a Change in Exempt Status
for the Library Assistant I Classification. (RESOLUTION NO. 2022-043)
(CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopt a Resolution
updating the Executive Management Group (EMG) Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 2021-22,
including a salary adjustment to the Planning and Economic Development Director and Assistant
City Manager classifications, and updating the Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association
(RCCEA) Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 2021-22, including a change in exempt status for the
Library Assistant I classification.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council traditionally adopts salary resolutions for classifications employed by the City of
Rancho Cucamonga. These resolutions are updated to reflect changes in salaries, additions and
deletions of classifications, changes in job titles, and other terms of employment.
ANALYSIS:
The Planning and Economic Development Director position is an update to the vacant Planning
Director classification that adds critical economic development duties to the responsibilities of this
position. This position is responsible for setting and implementing a strategic vision for the
Planning and Economic Development Department, policy development, program planning,
community engagement, budget management, and operational direction of the Planning and
Economic Development Department functions. Staff is recommending a 2% salary adjustment to
the position due to the expanded responsibilities and to help with recruitment and retention of the
position.
In 2015, the City adopted compaction language in the Executive Management MOU. In reviewing
the current Executive Management salary schedule, staff found the vacant Assistant City
Manager position’s top step salary had not been adjusted accordingly to a subordinate position.
Staff recommends adjusting the salary in accordance with the current Executive Management
MOU.
Page 173
Page 2
1
2
3
4
The City has not previously employed a full-time Library Assistant I position. In reviewing the
position prior to a current recruitment for a full-time employee, staff determined that based on the
scope of the duties in the job description and envisioned by the Library, this position should be
classified as a general position and not a supervisory professional position. This makes the
position non-exempt under the FLSA, and therefore eligible for overtime pay. The position would
then not be eligible for administrative leave or other benefits afforded a supervisory professional
position. Staff consulted with RCCEA on this change.
In an effort to assist with recruitment and retention efforts and reflect the additional duties, staff
recommends that the City Council approve a 2% increase to the Planning and Economic
Development Director salary range. Staff also recommends that the City Council approve an
increase to the Assistant City Manager salary schedule of 13% to reflect the compaction language
of the current MOU. Staff further recommends changing the Library Assistant I position from a
supervisory professional position to a general employee position to reflect its non-exempt status.
Finally, staff recommends adopting the attached EMG and RCCEA salary schedule reflecting
these changes.
All other salaries, classifications, job titles, and other terms of employment remain the same.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Adjustments to the salary ranges can be absorbed upon the position being filled at a lower pay
step and the change in exempt status should be cost neutral.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item addresses the City Council’s core values of intentionally embracing and anticipating the
future and attaining equitable prosperity for all.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Resolution No. 2022-043
Attachment 2 – Executive Management Group Salary Schedule
Attachment 3 – Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association Salary Schedule
Page 174
Resolution No. 2022-043 - Page 1 of 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-043
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT GROUP
SALARY SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021-22, INCLUDING A
SALARY ADJUSTMENT TO THE PLANNING AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR AND ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
CLASSIFICATIONS, AND THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY
EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION SALARY SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2021-22, INCLUDING A CHANGE IN EXEMPT STATUS FOR
THE LIBRARY ASSISTANT I CLASSIFICATION.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has determined that it is
necessary for the efficient operation and management of the City that policies be established
prescribing salary ranges, benefits and holidays and other policies for employees of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has previously adopted
salary resolutions establishing salary ranges, benefits and other terms of employment for
employees of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga recognize that it is
necessary from time to time to amend the salary resolution to accommodate changes in position
titles, classifications salary ranges, benefits and other terms of employment; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, California to approve the attached salary schedules for the Executive Management
Group and the Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association (Attachments 2-3) effective
April 20, 2022.
PASSED, APROVED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of April 2022.
Page 175
Minimum Control Point Maximum
Class Title Step Amount Step Amount Step Amount
Animal Services Director 1604 $9,478 1644 $11,570 1674 $13,427
Assistant City Manager 1698 $15,415 1738 $18,490 1768 $21,475
Building and Safety Services Director 1609 $9,716 1649 $11,863 1679 $13,777
City Clerk Services Director 1594 $9,016 1632 $10,897 1675 $13,505
City Manager 1756 $20,226 1796 $24,693 1826 $28,678
Community Services Director 1627 $10,629 1667 $12,977 1697 $15,070
Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services 1647 $11,744 1687 $14,338 1717 $16,652
Deputy City Manager/Civic & Cultural Services 1647 $11,744 1687 $14,338 1717 $16,652
Deputy City Manager/ Econ. & Comm. Dev.1647 $11,744 1687 $14,338 1717 $16,652
Eng Svs Director/City Engineer 1628 $10,682 1668 $13,041 1698 $15,145
Finance Director 1629 $10,736 1669 $13,106 1699 $15,222
Human Resources Director 1621 $10,316 1661 $12,593 1691 $14,627
Innovation and Technology Director 1637 $11,174 1677 $13,640 1697 $15,070
Library Director 1615 $10,012 1655 $12,222 1685 $14,195
Planning and Economic Development Director 1625 $10,524 1665 $12,848 1695 $14,920
Public Works Services Director 1609 $9,716 1649 $11,863 1679 $13,777
Fire Chief*A $15,982 F $20,397
* Included for informational purposes only - This is a Fire District Management Employee Group position not a City position
EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT GROUP
ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES
Monthly Pay Ranges effective April 20, 2022
Resolution No. 2022-043
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 176
Resolution No. 2022-043
RCCEA COVERED EMPLOYEES IN THE
SUPERVISORY/PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL EMPLOYEES GROUPS
ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES
Monthly Pay Ranges Effective April 20, 2022
Minimum Control Point Maximum
Class Title Step Amount Step Amount Step Amount
Account Clerk 4375 $3,101 4415 $3,786 4435 $4,183
Account Technician 4423 $3,939 4463 $4,808 4483 $5,314
Accountant#3465 $4,858 3505 $5,930 3525 $6,551
Accounts Payable Supervisor#3470 $4,980 3510 $6,079 3530 $6,717
Administrative Assistant 4369 $3,009 4409 $3,673 4429 $4,059
Administrative Technician 4437 $4,225 4477 $5,157 4497 $5,697
Animal Behavior Specialist 4388 $3,308 4428 $4,039 4448 $4,463
Animal Care Attendant 4349 $2,724 4389 $3,325 4409 $3,673
Animal Care Supervisor#3440 $4,288 3480 $5,233 3500 $5,783
Animal Caretaker 4378 $3,149 4418 $3,842 4438 $4,245
Animal Rescue Specialist 4388 $3,308 4428 $4,039 4448 $4,463
Animal Services Dispatcher 4369 $3,009 4409 $3,673 4429 $4,059
Animal Services Officer I 4421 $3,901 4461 $4,761 4481 $5,261
Animal Services Officer II 4441 $4,309 4481 $5,261 4501 $5,813
Artistic Producer - Mainstreet Theatre
Company
4450 $4,508 4490 $5,502 4510 $6,079
Assistant Engineer#3488 $5,446 3528 $6,649 3548 $7,348
Assistant Planner#3468 $4,931 3508 $6,019 3528 $6,649
Associate Engineer#3518 $6,326 3558 $7,722 3578 $8,533
Associate Planner#3487 $5,420 3527 $6,618 3547 $7,311
Box Office Coordinator 4450 $4,508 4490 $5,502 4510 $6,079
Budget Analyst#3515 $6,232 3555 $7,607 3575 $8,405
Building Inspection Supervisor#2 3504 $5,899 3544 $7,202 3564 $7,958
Building Inspector I2 4444 $4,373 4484 $5,339 4504 $5,899
Building Inspector II2 4464 $4,832 4504 $5,899 4524 $6,518
Business License Clerk 4378 $3,149 4418 $3,842 4438 $4,245
Business License Inspector 4418 $3,842 4458 $4,690 4478 $5,183
Business License Program Coordinator#3432 $4,121 3472 $5,028 3492 $5,556
Business License Program Supervisor#3470 $4,980 3510 $6,079 3530 $6,717
Business License Technician 4408 $3,656 4448 $4,463 4468 $4,931
City Clerk Records Management Analyst#3470 $4,980 3510 $6,079 3530 $6,717
Community Affairs Coordinator 4450 $4,508 4490 $5,502 4510 $6,079
Community Affairs Officer#3515 $6,232 3555 $7,607 3575 $8,405
Community Affairs Senior Coordinator#3480 $5,233 3520 $6,390 3540 $7,060
Community Affairs Specialist 4350 $2,736 4390 $3,341 4410 $3,692
Community Affairs Technician 4437 $4,225 4477 $5,157 4497 $5,697
ATTACHMENT 3Page177
Community Development Technician I 4413 $3,746 4453 $4,575 4473 $5,055
Community Development Technician II 4423 $3,939 4463 $4,808 4483 $5,314
Community Improvement Supervisor#2 3504 $5,899 3544 $7,202 3564 $7,958
Community Improvement Officer I 4421 $3,901 4461 $4,761 4481 $5,261
Community Improvement Officer II 4441 $4,309 4481 $5,261 4501 $5,813
Community Programs Coordinator 4450 $4,508 4490 $5,502 4510 $6,079
Community Programs Specialist 4437 $4,225 4477 $5,157 4497 $5,697
Community Services Coordinator 4450 $4,508 4490 $5,502 4510 $6,079
Community Services Project Coordinator#3500 $5,783 3540 $7,060 3560 $7,799
Community Services Specialist 4350 $2,736 4390 $3,341 4410 $3,692
Community Services Supervisor#3480 $5,233 3520 $6,390 3540 $7,060
Community Services Technician 4437 $4,225 4477 $5,157 4497 $5,697
Community Theater Producer 4450 $4,508 4490 $5,502 4510 $6,079
Customer Care Assistant 4349 $2,724 4409 $3,673 4429 $4,059
Customer Service Representative 4378 $3,149 4418 $3,842 4438 $4,245
Deputy City Clerk#3430 $4,079 3470 $4,980 3490 $5,502
Engineering Aide 4421 $3,901 4461 $4,761 4481 $5,261
Engineering Technician 4441 $4,309 4481 $5,261 4501 $5,813
Environmental Programs Coordinator#3503 $5,870 3543 $7,167 3563 $7,918
Environmental Programs Inspector2 4464 $4,832 4504 $5,899 4524 $6,518
Event & Rental Services Coordinator 4450 $4,508 4490 $5,502 4510 $6,079
Executive Assistant II#3444 $4,373 3484 $5,339 3504 $5,899
Executive Assistant1 4394 $3,409 4464 $4,832 4484 $5,339
Fleet Supervisor#2 3488 $5,446 3528 $6,649 3548 $7,348
Front of House Coordinator 4450 $4,508 4490 $5,502 4510 $6,079
Fund Development Coordinator#3470 $4,980 3510 $6,079 3530 $6,717
GIS Analyst#3505 $5,930 3545 $7,239 3565 $7,996
GIS Specialist 4456 $4,645 4496 $5,669 4516 $6,264
GIS Supervisor#3535 $6,887 3575 $8,405 3595 $9,287
GIS Technician 4436 $4,202 4476 $5,130 4496 $5,669
Human Resources Business Partner#3433 $4,140 3473 $5,055 3493 $5,586
Human Resources Clerk 4389 $3,325 4429 $4,059 4449 $4,484
Human Resources Technician 4408 $3,656 4448 $4,463 4468 $4,931
Information Technology Analyst I#3505 $5,930 3545 $7,239 3565 $7,996
Information Technology Analyst II#3520 $6,390 3560 $7,799 3580 $8,616
Information Technology Specialist I 4456 $4,645 4496 $5,669 4516 $6,264
Resolution No. 2022-043
RCCEA COVERED EMPLOYEES IN THE
SUPERVISORY/PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL EMPLOYEES GROUPS
ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES
Monthly Pay Ranges Effective April 20, 2022
Minimum Control Point Maximum
ATTACHMENT 3Page178
Information Technology Specialist II 4471 $5,005 4511 $6,109 4531 $6,750
Information Technology Technician 4411 $3,710 4451 $4,528 4471 $5,005
Lead Park Ranger 4421 $3,901 4461 $4,761 4481 $5,261
Librarian I#3435 $4,183 3475 $5,106 3495 $5,641
Librarian II#3457 $4,667 3497 $5,697 3517 $6,296
Library Assistant I 3373 $3,068 3413 $3,746 3433 $4,140
Library Assistant II#3414 $3,767 3454 $4,598 3474 $5,080
Library Clerk 4356 $2,820 4396 $3,443 4416 $3,803
Library Technician 4393 $3,391 4433 $4,140 4453 $4,575
Maintenance Supervisor#2 3488 $5,446 3528 $6,649 3548 $7,348
Management Aide 4440 $4,288 4480 $5,233 4500 $5,783
Management Analyst I#3470 $4,980 3510 $6,079 3530 $6,717
Management Analyst II#3498 $5,726 3538 $6,991 3558 $7,722
Management Analyst III#3515 $6,232 3555 $7,607 3575 $8,405
Office Services Clerk 4369 $3,009 4409 $3,673 4429 $4,059
Patron & Events Supervisor#3480 $5,233 3520 $6,390 3540 $7,060
Payroll Supervisor#3470 $4,980 3510 $6,079 3530 $6,717
Planning Specialist 4443 $4,351 4483 $5,314 4503 $5,870
Planning Technician 4423 $3,939 4463 $4,808 4483 $5,314
Plans Examiner I 4474 $5,080 4514 $6,202 4534 $6,852
Plans Examiner II#3488 $5,446 3528 $6,649 3548 $7,348
Procurement & Contracts Analyst#3433 $4,140 3473 $5,055 3493 $5,586
Procurement Clerk 4374 $3,086 4414 $3,767 4434 $4,162
Procurement Technician 4411 $3,710 4451 $4,528 4471 $5,005
Public Services Technician I 4413 $3,746 4453 $4,575 4473 $5,055
Public Services Technician II 4423 $3,939 4463 $4,808 4483 $5,314
Public Services Technician III 4443 $4,351 4483 $5,314 4503 $5,870
Public Works Inspector I2 4444 $4,373 4484 $5,339 4504 $5,899
Public Works Inspector II2 4464 $4,832 4504 $5,899 4524 $6,518
Public Works Safety Coordinator #2 3468 $4,931 3508 $6,019 3528 $6,649
Records Clerk 4358 $2,848 4398 $3,477 4418 $3,842
Records Coordinator 4386 $3,274 4426 $3,999 4446 $4,417
Risk Management Coordinator#3470 $4,980 3510 $6,079 3530 $6,717
Senior Account Clerk 4395 $3,426 4435 $4,183 4455 $4,620
Senior Account Technician 4446 $4,417 4486 $5,394 4506 $5,960
Senior Accountant#3498 $5,726 3538 $6,991 3558 $7,722
Resolution No. 2022-043
RCCEA COVERED EMPLOYEES IN THE
SUPERVISORY/PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL EMPLOYEES GROUPS
ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES
Monthly Pay Ranges Effective April 20, 2022
Minimum Control Point Maximum
ATTACHMENT 3Page179
Senior Animal Services Officer#3461 $4,761 3501 $5,813 3521 $6,422
Senior Building Inspector#2 3484 $5,339 3524 $6,518 3544 $7,202
Senior Business License Clerk 4398 $3,477 4438 $4,245 4458 $4,690
Senior Community Improvement Officer#3461 $4,761 3501 $5,813 3521 $6,422
Senior Electrician #3485 $5,367 3525 $6,551 3545 $7,239
Senior GIS Analyst #3520 $6,390 3560 $7,799 3580 $8,616
Senior Information Technology Analyst#3535 $6,887 3575 $8,405 3595 $9,287
Senior Information Technology Specialist#4493 $5,586 4533 $6,819 4553 $7,533
Senior Librarian#3468 $4,931 3508 $6,019 3528 $6,649
Senior Park Planner#3500 $5,783 3540 $7,060 3560 $7,799
Senior Plans Examiner#3503 $5,870 3543 $7,167 3563 $7,918
Senior Procurement Technician#3463 $4,808 3503 $5,870 3523 $6,486
Senior Risk Management Analyst#3515 $6,232 3555 $7,607 3575 $8,405
Senior Veterinary Technician#3461 $4,761 3501 $5,813 3521 $6,422
Special Districts Analyst#3498 $5,726 3538 $6,991 3558 $7,722
Supervising Public Works Inspector#2 3494 $5,612 3534 $6,852 3554 $7,570
Supervising Traffic Systems Specialist#2 3502 $5,841 3542 $7,131 3562 $7,878
Theater Production Coordinator 4460 $4,738 4500 $5,783 4520 $6,390
Theater Production Supervisor#3480 $5,233 3520 $6,390 3540 $7,060
Theatre Technician III 4423 $3,939 4463 $4,808 4483 $5,314
Utilities Operation Supervisor#3515 $6,232 3555 $7,607 3575 $8,405
Veterinary Assistant 4407 $3,637 4447 $4,441 4467 $4,905
Veterinary Technician 4437 $4,225 4477 $5,157 4497 $5,697
1. When acting as Clerk to Commissions $50 paid per night or weekend day meeting. Compensatory time off
can be substituted in lieu of $50 at the option of the employee.2. Refer to MOU for provision of boot
allowance.# Denotes Supervisory/Professional Class
Resolution No. 2022-043
RCCEA COVERED EMPLOYEES IN THE
SUPERVISORY/PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL EMPLOYEES GROUPS
ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES
Monthly Pay Ranges Effective April 20, 2022
Minimum Control Point Maximum
ATTACHMENT 3Page180
DATE:April 20, 2022
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Matthew R. Burris, AICP, Deputy City Manager/Interim Planning Director
Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner
SUBJECT:PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE DESIGN
REVIEW DRC2019-00766 - RALPH KARUBIAN, APPLICANT. The
Project is a Site Plan and Architectural Review of a 159,580 Square-Foot
Industrial/Warehouse Building on 7.39 Acres of Land in the Industrial
Employment (IE) District on the Northwest Corner of Jersey Boulevard
and Milliken Avenue; APN: 0229-111-60. An Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) Was Prepared For This Project. (RESOLUTION NO. 2022-
035 AND RESOLUTION NO. 2022-036) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission
decision to approve Design Review DRC2019-00766 by adopting City Council Resolution No.
2022-035 and certify the related EIR by adopting City Council Resolution No. 2022-036.
BACKGROUND:
On February 9, 2022, Design Review DRC2019-00766 for a site plan and architectural review for
the construction of a 159,580 square-foot industrial/warehouse building went before the Planning
Commission for consideration (Attachment 1). Prior to the meeting, correspondence was received
from Lozeau Drury, LLP, raising concerns related to the adequacy of the EIR. The Planning
Commission reviewed the correspondence from Lozeau Drury, LLP, and determined that the EIR
adequately addressed all potential impacts of the project. The Planning Commission certified the
EIR (SCH No. 2021060608) and approved Design Review DRC2019-00766 (Attachment 2). On
February 17, 2022, an appeal of the Planning Commission approval was received from Lozeau
Drury, LLP, within the 10-day appeal period.
The project includes the construction of an industrial/warehouse building totaling 159,580 square
feet, divided into four separate units. Units range in size from 38,490 to 42,368 square feet. No
specific use has been proposed for any of the units at this time, although it is anticipated that the
building will primarily house small warehouse/storage/distribution businesses.
The dock loading/storage area will be located on the north side (rear) of the building away from
public view. There are three proposed points of vehicular access located along the south (Jersey
Boulevard) and northeast (Milliken Avenue) portions of the project site. The project meets all
pertinent development standards in the underlying zoning district including setbacks, parking,
Page 181
Page 2
1
1
8
8
landscaping, and building height at the time it was deemed complete. The physical building as
well as the anticipated warehouse/storage/distribution uses for the project site meets the purpose
and intent of the underlying General Plan designation. The project was deemed complete prior to
the adoption of the new industrial standards through Ordinance 982. However, while the project
is exempt from these requirements, the applicant has made a diligent effort to incorporate
requirements of Ord. 982 into the project where feasible.
ANALYSIS:
The appellant’s appeal letter (Attachment 3) asserts that that project’s EIR fails to thoroughly
analyze the project’s impacts related to Air Quality and Biological Resources. The applicant has
provided response letters from Birdseye Planning Group (Attachment 4) and ELMT Consulting
(Attachment 5) to address the comments discussed in the appeal. Responses to the appellant’s
comments are summarized below.
A1: EIR Fails to Establish an Accurate Baseline for Sensitive Biological Resources
Response:
As discussed in the Habitat Assessment prepared by ELMT Consulting, Inc. (May 21 2020),
the project site is in an area that is almost entirely developed. There are a few undeveloped
parcels within the general area with no direct connection to undeveloped/native habitats. The
project site has been subject to routine human disturbance associated with the surrounding
developments for nearly 30 years. As stated in Habitat Assessment, no natural plant
communities are present on the project site and only heavily disturbed, human modified areas
will be affected by development of the proposed project. The project site has been
substantially altered by past development activities in the surrounding area over the last few
decades and does not support high quality habitat for foraging or nesting. Regular site
maintenance (weed clearance, etc.) and lack of vegetation severally reduces the foraging and
nesting opportunities.
The assertion that the project plans to improperly rely on a future pre-construction survey to
determine the presence/absence of burrowing owls is inaccurate. ELMT’s opinion is that the
project site does not support suitable habitat for burrowing owls and burrowing owls are
presumed absent. Regulatory compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and
California Fish and Game Code requires a preconstruction clearance survey for nesting birds
be conducted within three (3) days of the start of any vegetation removal or ground disturbing
activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed during construction between
February 1 and August 31. Given the disturbed nature of the project site, and the lack of
vegetation present on the site, there is a lack of habitat suitable for use as nesting sites.
A2: EIR Fails to Address the Project’s Potential Significant Impact on Loss of Breeding
Capacity
Response:
The project site has been substantially altered by past disturbance and development activities
in the surrounding area over the last few decades. The site does not support long term
breeding habitat for nesting birds. Regular site maintenance (weed clearance, etc.) and
remediation activities as well as a lack of vegetation limits the breeding capacity of the project
site. Implementation of the proposed project would not significantly impact the loss of breeding
capacity for nesting birds, particularly to the degree referenced in the comment letter.
Page 182
Page 3
1
1
8
8
A3: EIR Inadequately Analyzed the Project’s Impact on Wildlife Movement
Response:
The project site has been substantially altered by past development activities in the
surrounding area over the last few decades and does not currently contain functioning native
habitat for any wildlife that may occur in the area. Regular site maintenance (weed clearance,
etc.) and remediation activities has occurred on the project site. Further, the project site is not
located in an existing wildlife migration corridor. Because the project site is surrounded by
existing development, does not support native habitat and is not located in a migratory
corridor, ELMT stands by its assessment that implementation of the project will not result in
impacts to wildlife movement.
A4: EIR Fails to Address Impacts on Wildlife from Additional Traffic Generated by the
Project
Response:
The comment asserts the impacts of wildlife mortality from traffic generated by the proposed
project was not addressed in the EIR. The project site is heavily disturbed and surrounded by
heavily trafficked streets and existing industrial buildings. The project area does not support
high quality habitat for wildlife species. Further, based on ELMT’s assessment, the site is not
expected to provide suitable habitat for the majority of the special-status wildlife known to
occur in the area. Thus, the project would not modify habitat used by special-status species.
Therefore, development of the project site would not substantially increase the level of road
mortality for wildlife, in particular special status species.
A5: EIR Fails to Adequately Address the Project’s Cumulative Impacts on Wildlife in
the Region
Response:
The comment encompasses a much larger perspective on impacts to native wildlife and is not
directly applicable to the immediate project site because the site is heavily disturbed and
surrounded by existing development. ELMT’s assessment that the project will not result in
cumulative impacts to biological resources because of the lack of habitat and resources on
and immediately adjacent to the project site remains applicable and adequately addresses
concerns related to potentially impacted wildlife
B1: EIR Relies on Unsubstantiated Input Parameters to Estimate Project Emissions;
and thus, the Project Will Result in Significant Air Quality Impact
Response:
Regarding Failure to Model All Proposed Land Uses:
The air emissions model was prepared to provide a conservative estimation of daily air
emissions and annual greenhouse gas emissions associated with operation of the proposed
project. The air quality modeling excluded the office use and replaced it with warehouse use.
Excluding the office use in the air quality model is a more conservative approach since the
office square footage in the air quality model will actually decrease project emissions from
what was originally modelled in the EIR.
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) developed an air emissions modelling tool called
CalEEMod, which is the model used for the EIR. To determine whether the point raised by the
Page 183
Page 4
1
1
8
8
appellant would make a difference in the impact associated with daily and annual emissions,
CalEEMod was revised to reduce the warehouse square footage by 8,127 square feet and
add 8,127 square feet of office space. The only change in the area and energy emissions was
a reduction in reactive organic gas emissions associated with energy use, again decreasing
the assumed values in the model used in the EIR. Therefore, modifying CalEEMod as
referenced herein would not change the significance finding.
Regarding Incorrect Application of Area-Related Operational Mitigation Measure:
The appellant contends that any changes to model defaults be justified. However as stated in
the comment letter, the “User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data” table fails to provide a
justification for the above changes.
It is true that no notes were included on the architectural coating screens in CalEEMod
2020.4.0 to justify why low VOC coatings were selected for modeling purposes. However, the
reason for doing so is provided on Page 21 of the Air Quality-Greenhouse Gas Technical
Report. Similar to implementation of SCAQMD Rule 403 to control dust during construction,
SCAQMD Rule 1113 requires the use of low-VOC paint (architectural coatings). It is common
methodology to assume 50 g/L for nonflat coatings and 100 g/L for pavement coatings (as
done so in the EIR) and this approach is routinely used when evaluating project-related air
quality impacts in the South Coast Air Basin. It is important to note that compliance with
existing rules and regulations is not considered mitigation for the purpose of CEQA review.
Should the appellant require additional evidence that in fact low VOC coatings would be
implemented, the project can be conditioned to apply only coatings meeting these emission
requirements.
B2: The EIR Fails to Adequately Evaluate Health Risk Impacts from Diesel Particulate
Matter Emissions.
Response:
Regarding Diesel Particulate Matter Health Risk Emissions Inadequately Evaluated:
The appellant states that the EIR concludes that the Project would have a less-than-significant
health risk impact without conducting a quantified construction or operational Health Risk
Analysis (HRA). The appellant states that because the EIR fails to prepare a quantified
construction and operational HRA the project is inconsistent with CEQA’s requirement to
correlate the increase in emissions that the project would generate to the adverse impacts on
human health caused by those emissions.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga defers to threshold guidance established by the SCAQMD
and utilizes the SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook and subsequent guidance provided
on the SCAQMD website.
As stated in the EIR, the proposed project will not exceed the daily emission thresholds
established by the SCAQMD. While the project is not a sensitive use, the nearest sensitive
use is located approximately one-half mile south of the site along Milliken Avenue. The daily
traffic volumes on Milliken Avenue are and would remain less than the CARB recommended
threshold for significant impact. The project-related truck traffic would not pose a health risk
that would justify further evaluation in a construction or operational health risk assessment.
Page 184
Page 5
1
1
8
8
B3: The EIR Fails to Adequately Evaluate Greenhouse Gas Impacts from the Project.
Failure to Adequately Evaluate Greenhouse Gas Impacts
Incorrect and Unsubstantiated Quantitative Analysis of Emissions
Failure to Consider Performance-based Standards Under CARB’s 2017 Scoping
Plan
Response:
The projected Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions for the project is 2,410 metric tons (MT) of
Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO2e) annually, which is less than 25% of the annual threshold
of 10,000 MT of CO2e annually. While the appellant does not identify specific emission
sources that were neglected in the modeling, we can assume that they are referring to energy
emissions associated with operation of the office space relative to the same area of
warehouse space. If CalEEMod was revised to remove 8,127 square feet of warehouse space
and replace it with the same amount of office space, the project’s total annual GHG emissions
will be 2,420 MT CO2e, 10 MT more than what was originally modelled in the EIR. This is
conservative as the heavy truck trip volumes were not reduced to reflect the smaller
warehouse square footage. The GHG emissions would remain less than 25% of the annual
threshold. The significance of the impact would not change from what was disclosed in the
EIR.
The appellant further states that the EIR is insufficient because the project was not compared
to the performance-based standards within CARB’s scoping plan and the Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities
Strategy. As stated in the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Technical Report, the City of
Rancho Cucamonga does not have an adopted threshold of significance for GHG emissions.
Thus, for CEQA purposes, the City has discretion to select an appropriate significance
criterion, based on substantial evidence. The SCAQMD's adopted numerical threshold of
10,000 MTCO2e/year for industrial stationary source emissions is used as the significance
criterion in the subject EIR and other warehouse projects approved by the City. The
consistency analysis is commonly performed by evaluating project consistency with applicable
goals, policies and/or action items in the statewide and regional planning documents.
Staff has reviewed the appellant’s comments and the applicant’s responses and determined that
the EIR as certified by the Planning Commission on February 9, 2022, adequately addresses all
CEQA requirements. Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal, certify the EIR
(SCH No. 2021060608), and uphold the Planning Commission decision to approve Design
Review DRC2019-00766.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The applicant has submitted a Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared by Stanley R. Hoffman and
Associates, dated April 5, 2021. The Fiscal Impact Analysis concluded that the City would receive
an estimated one-time development impact fee revenue of $1,020,930. Additionally, the project
would produce an annual recurring surplus to the General Fund in the amount of $3,492 and
$5,224 to the Library Fund from property tax revenues
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
The development of the project achieves the City Council’s Core Value of “Intentionally embracing
and anticipating the future,” and “continuous improvement.” In addition to providing the City with
new industrial warehouse facilities which will attract quality tenants, the project also results in
parkway improvements along Jersey Boulevard and Milliken Avenue, enhancing the visual
character and streetscape of these throughfares.
Page 185
Page 6
1
1
8
8
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – February 9, 2022 Planning Commission Staff Report with Exhibits
Attachment 2 – Planning Commission Resolutions 22-01 and 22-02.
Attachment 3 – Lozeau Drury, LLP Appeal Letter dated February 17, 2022
Attachment 4 – Biological Resource Responses dated March 7, 2022
Attachment 5 – Air Quality Responses dated March 8, 2022
Attachment 6 – City Council Resolution 2022-035 (Design Review)
Attachment 7 – City Council Resolution 2022-036 (EIR)
Page 186
DATE: February 9, 2022
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Matthew R. Burris, AICP, LEED AP, Deputy City Manager/Interim Planning Director
INITIATED BY:Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner
SUBJECT:LOCATED AT 11298 JERSEY BLVD NORTHWEST CORNER OF JERSEY
BOULEVARD AND MILLIKEN AVENUE – 11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC - A
request to construct a 159,580 square-foot industrial/warehouse building on a
vacant 7.39-acre parcel within the Industrial Employment (IE) District, APN: 0229-
111-60. Staff has prepared an Environmental Impact Report of environmental
impacts for consideration. (Design Review DRC2019-00766).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following action:
• Certify the attached Environmental Impact Report of environmental impacts and adopt the project’s
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and
• Approve Design Review DRC2019-00766 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval
with Conditions.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A request to construct a 159,580 square-foot industrial/warehouse building on a vacant 7.39-acre site.
BACKGROUND:
The project site is a vacant parcel with an area of 7.39 acres (Exhibit A). The rectangular project site has
dimensions of about 750 feet east to west and about 450 feet north to south. The street frontage of the site
along Jersey Boulevard and Milliken Avenue is about 680 feet and 450 feet respectively. The site is generally
level with a gradient from north to south. The elevation of the site is about 1,140 feet and 1,130 feet at the
north and south property lines respectively, which results in a change in elevation of about 10 feet. There are
no trees on the site and vegetation/ground cover is very limited.
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 Industrial Employment Industrial Employment (IE) District
North Industrial/Warehouse Buildings Neo Industrial Neo Industrial (NI) District
South Fire Station and Training Center Industrial Employment Industrial Employment (IE) District
East Industrial/Warehouse Building Industrial Employment Industrial Employment (IE) District
West Industrial/Warehouse Building Industrial Employment Industrial Employment (IE) District
Page 7Page187
Page 2 of 6
1
1
0
4
PROJECT ANALYSIS:
A. General: The applicant proposes to construct an industrial/warehouse building totaling 159,580 square
feet, divided into four separate units. (Exhibit B). Units range in size from 38,490 to 42,368 square feet,
with each unit featuring an office and restroom area of roughly 2,000 square feet. All office/restroom
areas are located toward the front of the building either along Jersey Boulevard or Milliken Avenue. No
specific use has been proposed for any of the units at this time, although it is anticipated that the building
will primarily house small warehouse/storage/distribution businesses.
The dock loading/storage area will be located on the north side (rear) of the building away from public
view. The rear loading/unloading area will be secured by a 6-foot-high wrought iron fence along the
interior north and east property line. Retaining walls with a maximum height of 4 feet and 6 inches are
proposed on two areas along the site’s interior north property line to make up for the grade difference
between the subject property and the existing lot to the north. The combined height of all iron fencing
and retaining walls is 8 feet, meeting the 8-foot maximum wall height for industrial areas.
On July 16, 2021, the City Council adopted Ordinance 982 which established new development
standards for industrial projects throughout the City in response to a high demand in industrial
development. This project is exempt from Ordinance 982 as the project was deemed complete on
January 4, 2021, prior to Ordinance 982 becoming effective on August 20, 2021.
The proposed project meets all applicable development standards according to the development code
prior to the adoption of Ordinance 982 for the Industrial Employment (IE) District (formerly Minimum
Impact/Heavy Industrial), as shown in the table below. The project also complies with the landscaping
requirements as prescribed in the Development Code. The distribution of landscaping will be generally
along the street frontages, in the parking lot, and along the south and west sides of the project site.
Development Standard Required Proposed Complies?
Building Height Max 70' *45’YES
Floor Area Ratio 0.4 to 0.6 0.5 YES
Front Setback - Major Arterial
(Milliken Avenue)Min. 45’63’YES
Front Setback – Collector
(Jersey Boulevard)Min. 25’85’YES
Rear Setback 0’121’YES
Landscape Percentage Min. 10%10.81%YES
Landscape – Number of Trees Min. 31 111 YES
*Max 70 feet as long as building is set back 1 foot from front setback for every 1-foot building height exceeds 35 feet.
B. Architecture: The proposed building will be of concrete tilt-up construction painted with a palette of two
colors. The building will have form-lined concrete panels at various locations (Exhibit C). As the uses
expected within the building are to be logistics oriented, there is limited articulation of the wall planes in
order to maximize the efficiency of the interior space. However, this limited articulation does not result in
an overwhelming building mass, as vertical columns of sandblasted concrete break up the building
façade. Additionally, a generous application of glass panels along the building’s east and south elevations
facing public streets resemble the appearance of an office building (Exhibit D). Four standing seam
canopies are featured above the four suite entrances along the building’s south elevation, further
increasing architectural interest.
Page 8Page188
Page 3 of 6
1
1
0
4
C. Parking and Circulation: There are three proposed points of vehicular access located along the south
(Jersey Boulevard) and northeast (Milliken Avenue) portions of the project site. Two driveways leading
directly to the rear loading dock will be secured by sliding wrought iron gates. To maintain adequate
ingress and egress for emergency vehicles for the public safety facility immediately south of the site, the
project is conditioned to only allow right in, right out truck traffic from the westernmost driveway along
Jersey Boulevard. Per Table 17.64.050-1 of the Development Code, the parking requirement is based
on the proposed mix of office and warehouse floor areas in the building. The project is required to provide
91 vehicle parking spaces based on the proposed 151,453 square feet of warehouse and 8,127 square
feet of office area as shown in the following table:
Type of Use Floor Area
(Square Feet)
Parking
Ratio
Number of
Spaces Required
Proposed Building (overall)159,580
Office 8,127 1/250 33
Warehouse 151,453 varies1 58
Total Required/Total Provided:91/912
1 - For warehouse uses, the parking calculations are 1 space per 1,000 square feet for the first 20,000 square feet; 1 space per 2,000
square feet for the second 20,000 square feet; and 1 space per 4,000 square feet for additional floor area in excess of the first 40,000
square feet.
2 - The trailer parking requirement is calculated separately from the standard parking requirement and is based on a ratio of one stall per
dock door. 12 trailer parking spaces are required, and 12 are provided.
D. Rail Spur: An existing north-south rail spur is located along the west property line of the project site. Per
Section 17.36.040.D.7 of the Development Code, the project is required to account for potential rail
service. The project proponent is not required to construct rail-related improvements on the property.
However, the project is required to demonstrate how the site could have a functional/practical rail service
in the event that any future owner/tenant decides that rail service is required/desired.
The applicant has prepared an Alternate Site Plan (Exhibit E) that shows a proposed rail spur aligned
along the west of the site and adjacent to the west side of the building, with the rail spur entering the
property at the northwest corner of the site. In the event that rail service is established, a drive aisle
running north to south of the project site will need to be modified for one-way traffic. No reduction in the
number of parking stalls will occur. Access by passenger vehicles, trucks, and emergency vehicles would
continue to comply with the applicable requirements described in the Development Code and
Building/Fire Code. The architecture and floor area of the building would not be affected by the addition
of the rail spur.
E. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Oaxaca,
Williams, and Smith) on February 2, 2021. No major or secondary issues were discussed, as reflected
in the Design Review Committee Comments (Exhibit F). The Committee recommended approval of the
project as proposed to the Planning Commission.
F. Public Art: This project is required to provide public art as outlined in Chapter 17.124 of the Development
Code. Based on the industrial square footage of the project, the total art value required per Section
17.124.020.C. is $159,580. A condition has been included pursuant to the Development Code that
requires the public art requirement to be met prior to occupancy.
CEQA DETERMINATION:
Pursuant to the California Environmental Act (CEQA), an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No.
Page 9Page189
Page 4 of 6
1
1
0
4
2021060608), has been prepared for this project. Under CEQA, the purpose of an EIR is to inform the public
about any significant impacts to the physical environment resulting from a project, identify ways to avoid or
lessen the impacts, identify alternatives, and promote public participation. The contents of the EIR become a
planning tool for the Planning Commission and City Council to use in determining the appropriate and best
land use for the project site.
The intent of this EIR is to address and evaluate potentially significant impacts of the proposed project and
identify feasible mitigation measures and alternatives that may be adopted to reduce or eliminate these
impacts. A summary of all of the project-related impacts and the recommended mitigation measures is provided
in the Final EIR. The following summarizes key points in the environmental review process:
Notice of Preparation and Public Scoping Meeting: The Notice of Preparation (NOP) serves as public
notification that an EIR is being prepared and requests comment and input from responsible agencies and
other interested parties regarding environmental issues to be addressed in the document. In addition to the
NOP, CEQA recommends conducting a scoping meeting for the purpose of identifying the range of potential
significant impacts that should be analyzed within the scope of the Draft EIR. The public scoping meeting is to
receive public testimony on those issues that the public would like to have addressed in the EIR as it relates
to the project and environment.
Accordingly, a notice advertising both the NOP and Public Scoping Meeting was prepared for the project and
circulated on June 28, 2021, to the State Clearinghouse (SCH No. 2021060608), public agencies, Native
American tribes, those interested parties who had previously requested notification and all property owners
within 660 feet of the subject site. The notice advertising the NOP and the public scoping meeting was also
published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on June 25, 2021 and made publicly available on the City’s website.
The Public Scoping Meeting was held virtually over Zoom on July 13, 2021. A representative from the
Southwest Carpenter’s Union was in attendance and discussed the importance of hiring a local workforce for
the construction of the project. The public comment period to respond to the NOP closed on August 3, 2021
and a comment letter was received from the Native American Heritage Commission. Written responses to all
significant environmental issues raised were prepared and made available in the Draft Environmental Impact
Report (DEIR).
AB 52 Compliance: Notification in accordance with AB 52 was sent on January 11, 2021 to tribal communities
from a list of six tribes that have requested notification by the city. In response, the San Manuel Band of Mission
Indians (SMBMI) responded with comments though they did not request consultation. Rather the SMBMI
provided language which they requested be made a part of the project mitigations. Accordingly, language from
SMBMI has been incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). One other tribe,
the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation, also responded to the City’s notification and requested
for consultation. However, no response from the tribe was received after multiple attempts to set up a
consultation. Therefore, mitigation measures previously approved by the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians
– Kizh Nation were incorporated into the MMRP.
Draft EIR Preparation and Circulation: Following the NOP and Public Scoping Meeting, a DEIR was prepared
and was distributed to Responsible and Trustee agencies, and individuals who requested to review the DEIR.
The DEIR was distributed for a 45-day public review period on November 12, 2021 with the comment period
concluding on December 27, 2021. A Notice of Availability including electronic links to the DEIR and all
technical appendices was posted at the County, published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, mailed to all
property owners within 660 feet, interested parties requesting such notification and posted on the city’s website
on November 9, 2021. Further, and also on November 9, 2021, the DEIR and all technical appendices were
provided to the Office of Planning and Research via the online “CEQAnet” portal for distribution to Responsible
and Trustee agencies and hard copies of the DEIR and all technical appendices were provided for public
review at the following locations:
Page 10Page190
Page 5 of 6
1
1
0
4
Archibald Library – 7368 Archibald Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730;
Paul A Biane Library – 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739;
Planning Department Public Counter at City Hall – 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA
91730.
Comments were received from the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD) and Lozeau Drury, LLP.
The CVWD letter received on November 30, 2021, requested that the DEIR reference CVWD’s 2020 Urban
Management Plan (UWMP) instead of the 2015 UWMP, provided notification that the applicant may be
responsible for relocating a sewer main adjacent to the subject site, and contained a reminder to coordinate
with the CVWD’s engineering department to determine pipeline capacity. The Final Environmental Impact
Report (FEIR) made all pertinent corrections with regards to the UWMP, clarified that the presence of the main
sewer line adjacent to the property has already been addressed in the DEIR, and noted that coordination with
CVWD’s Engineering Department is already required per the City’s Standard Conditions of Approval.
The letter received from Lozeau Drury, LLP received on November 19, 2021, stated that the DEIR fails as an
informational document and fails to impose feasible mitigation measures to reduce the project’s impacts. The
letter failed to provide any substantial evidence to explain or support this comment. Given the lack of substantial
evidence supporting their claim, no additional analysis, modification, mitigation or recirculation of the Draft EIR
is required.
Technical appendices and supporting documentation can be referenced on the City‘s website under the tab
”CEQA Documents Available for Review“ under the Current Projects & Planning Initiatives which can be
accessed here: https://www.cityofrc.us/community-development/planning.
Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP): In compliance with CEQA, a monitoring program has been
prepared. The MMRP is a reporting program that identifies each adopted mitigation measure or project design
feature that reduces the significance level of a particular impact. The MMRP indicates responsibility and timing
milestones for each mitigation measure.
Findings of Fact in Support of Determinations Related to Significant Environmental Impacts: The EIR
concludes that upon implementation of the project and all recommended mitigation measures, impacts
associated with the project would remain less than significant. No significant and unavoidable impact was
identified; thus, it is determined that no Statement of Overriding Consideration is required to be adopted.
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.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The applicant has submitted a Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared by Stanley R. Hoffman and Associates, dated
April 5, 2021. The Fiscal Impact Analysis concluded that the City would receive an estimated one-time
development impact fee revenue of $1,020,930. Additionally, the project would produce an annual recurring
surplus to the General Fund in the amount of $3,492 and $5,224 to the Library Fund from property tax
revenues.
Page 11Page191
Page 6 of 6
1
1
0
4
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
The development of the project achieves the City Council’s Core Value of “Intentionally embracing and
anticipating the future,” and “continuous improvement.” In addition to providing the City with new industrial
warehouse facilities which will attract quality tenants, the project also results in parkway improvements along
Jersey Boulevard and Milliken Avenue, enhancing the visual character and streetscape of these throughfares.
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A - Aerial
Exhibit B - Site Plan
Exhibit C - Elevations
Exhibit D - Renderings
Exhibit E - Alternate Site Plan for Rail Service
Exhibit F - Design Review Committee Comments (February 2, 2021) and Action Agenda
Exhibit G - Environmental Impact Report
Exhibit H - Mitigation Monitoring Program
Exhibit I - Draft Resolution 22-001 of Adoption for Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program
Exhibit J - Draft Resolution 22-002 of Approval for Design Review DRC2019-00766
Exhibit K - Statement of Agreement DRC2019-00766
Exhibit L - Conditions of Approval DRC2019-00766
Page 12Page192
PROJECT SITE
N
Exhibit A
Page 13Page193
JERSEY BLVD.MILLIKEN A
V
E
.333325243313142626231422OFFICEOFFICELOADINGDOCKLOADINGDOCKLOADINGDOCKLOADINGDOCK111619191955271429a202020331717181810101010101229b3131303244151521211119286OFFICEOFFICEOFFICEUNIT "101"UNIT "102"UNIT "104"UNIT "103"ELEC RMOFFICE3353535SITE PLAN KEYED NOTES : 1234567891012131415161718192021222311242526272829303132333435332828883434262773211111136363636363737383838383838373730III. CODE DATA:IV. SITE :I. OWNER / DEVELOPER :V. BUILDINGS AREA :VI. PARKING :PROJECT SUMMARYA-1
NORTHSITE PLANII. PROJECT ADDRESS :SHEET INDEXA-1 SITE PLAN AND PROJECT INFORMATIONA-2 FLOOR PLANA-3ROOF PLANBUILDING ELEVATIONSL-1 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANL-2 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE NOTES AND CALC1 OF 4 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN2 OF 4 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN1 OF 1 SITE UTILIZATION MAP2 OF 2 WQMP SITE PLANNOTE:SITE PLANA-1.B ALTERNATE SITE PLAN AND PROJECT INFORMATION1 OF 1 CUT & FILL EXHIBIT1 OF 2 WQMP SITE PLANA-43 OF 4 ALTERNATE PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN4 OF 4 ALTERNATE PRELIMINARY GRADING PLANA-1.1 FIRE ACCESS PLANA-1.2 FENCE SITE PLANA-1.3 PHOTOMETRIC SITE PLANExhibit B Page 14 Page 194
Exhibit C Page 15 Page 195
Exhibit D Page 16 Page 196
JERSEY BLVD.MILLIKEN A
V
E
.UNIT "101"UNIT "102"UNIT "104"UNIT "103"333325243313142626231422OFFICEOFFICEDOCK16191919552142820202033171718181010101010123224415151521211115OFFICEOFFICEOFFICEUNIT "101"UNIT "102"UNIT "104"UNIT "103"ELEC RMOFFICE6734343435282813LOADINGDOCKLOADINGDOCKLOADINGDOCKLOADINGDOCK113131303334111111363636362688SITE PLAN KEYED NOTES : 1234567891012131415161718192021222311242526272830313233343536737383838373729a29b293738III. CODE DATA:IV. SITE :I. OWNER / DEVELOPER :V. BUILDINGS AREA :VI. PARKING :PROJECT SUMMARYA-1.B
NORTHALTERNATE SITE PLANII. PROJECT ADDRESS :GATE ELEVATIONNOTE:Exhibit E Page 17 Page 197
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
February 2, 2021
7:00 p.m.
Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner
DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00766 – 11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC - A request to construct a
159,580 square-foot industrial/warehouse building on a vacant 7.39-acre parcel within the
Minimum Impact/Heavy Industrial (MI/HI) District, located at the northwest corner of Jersey
Boulevard and Milliken Avenue – APN: 0229-111-60. Staff is preparing an Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration.
Site Characteristics and Background: The project site is a vacant parcel with an area of 321,988
square feet (7.39 acres). The rectangular project site has dimensions of about 750 feet east to
west and about 450 feet north to south. The street frontage of the site along Jersey Boulevard
and Milliken Avenue is about 680 feet and 450 feet, respectively. The site is generally level with
a gradient from north to south. The elevation of the site is about 1,140 feet and 1,130 feet at the
north and south property lines respectively, which results in a change in elevation of about 10
feet. There are no trees on the site and vegetation/ground cover is very limited.
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 Heavy Industrial Minimum Impact/Heavy Industrial
(MI/HI) District
North Industrial/Warehouse
Buildings General Industrial General Industrial (GI) District
South Fire Station Civic/Regional Minimum Impact/Heavy Industrial
(MI/HI) District
East Industrial/Warehouse
Building Heavy Industrial Minimum Impact/Heavy Industrial
(MI/HI) District
West Industrial/Warehouse
Building Heavy Industrial Minimum Impact/Heavy Industrial
(MI/HI) District
Project Overview: The applicant proposes to construct an industrial/warehouse building totaling
159,580 square feet, divided into four separate units. Units range in size from 38,490 to 42,368
square feet, with each unit featuring an office and restroom area of roughly 2,000 square feet. All
office/restroom areas will be located toward the front of the building either along Jersey Boulevard
or Milliken Avenue. No specific use has been proposed for any of the units at this time, although
it is anticipated that the building will primarily house small warehouse/storage/distribution
businesses.
The dock loading/storage area will be located on the north side of the building away from public
view. There will be two points of vehicular access via two driveways at the southwest and
northeast corners of the project site. The building, based on the anticipated
warehousing/distribution use, is required to have 91 passenger vehicle parking stalls. The project
provides 91 stalls, meeting the parking requirement. As there are nine dock doors, a matching
number of trailer parking stalls are provided as required by the Development Code. The
distribution of landscaping is generally along the street frontages towards the east and south of
Exhibit F Page 18Page198
DRC COMMENTS
DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00766 – 11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC
February 2, 2021
Page 2OMMENTS
the project site, and within the building’s parking area. Landscape coverage is 10.81%, slightly
exceeding the landscape coverage of 10% required by the Development Code.
An existing north-south rail spur is located along the west property line of the project site. Per
Section 17.36.040.D.6 of the Development Code, the project is required to account for potential
rail service. The project proponent is not required to construct rail-related improvements on the
property, however, the project is required to demonstrate how the site could have a
functional/practical rail service in the event that any future owner/tenant decides that rail service
is required/desired.
The applicant has prepared an Alternate Site Plan (Sheet A1.B) and a Grading Plan (Grading
Sheet 3 of 4) that show a proposed rail spur aligned along the west of the site and adjacent to the
west side of the building, with the rail spur entering the property at the northwest corner of the
site. In the event that rail service is established, a drive aisle running north to south of the project
site will need to be removed. However, no reduction in the number of parking stalls will occur.
Access by passenger vehicles, trucks, and emergency vehicles would continue to comply with
the applicable requirements described in the Development Code and Building/Fire Code. The
architecture and floor area of the building would not be affected by the addition of the rail spur.
The proposed building will be of concrete tilt-up construction painted with a palette of two colors.
The building will have form-lined concrete panels at various locations. As the uses expected within
the building are to be logistics oriented, there is limited articulation of the wall planes in order to
maximize the efficiency of the interior space. However, this limited articulation does not result in
an overwhelming building mass, as vertical columns of sandblasted concrete break up the
building façade. Additionally, a generous application of glass panels along the building’s east and
south elevations facing public streets give the building appearance of an office building. Four
standing seam canopies are featured above the four suite entrances along the building’s south
elevation, further increasing architectural interest.
The rear loading/unloading area is secured by a 6-foot high wrought iron fence along the interior
north and east property lines of the site and sliding wrought iron gates are being installed at the
two driveway entrances. Retaining walls with a maximum height of 4 feet and 6 inches are
proposed on two areas along the site’s interior north property line to make up for grade difference.
The combined height of all iron fencing and retaining walls meet the 8-foot maximum wall height
for industrial areas.
Staff Comments:
The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion.
Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion
regarding the project:
None
Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
None
Page 19Page199
DRC COMMENTS
DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00766 – 11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC
February 2, 2021
Page 3OMMENTS
Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be
incorporated into the project design without discussion:
1. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) required and/or
proposed shall be installed at locations that are not within direct view or line-of-sight of the
office corner of the building. The specific locations of each DDC and FDC shall require the
review and approval of the Planning Department and Fire Construction Services/Fire
Department. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC)
screened behind a 4-foot high block wall. These walls shall be constructed of decorative
masonry block such as slumpstone or stackstone or poured in-place concrete with design
elements incorporated to match the building.
2. All ground-mounted equipment, including utility boxes, transformers, and back-flow devices,
shall be surrounded by a minimum of two rows of shrubs spaced a minimum of 18 inches on
center. All ground-mounted equipment shall be painted dark green except as directed
otherwise by the Fire Department.
3. Downspouts shall not be visible from the exterior on any elevations of the building. All
downspouts shall be routed through the interior of the building walls.
4. All wrought iron fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or similarly dark color.
5. Decorative paving shall be provided at each vehicle entrance to the site, behind the public
right-of-way. These decoratively paved areas shall extend from the front property line to the
building setback line and have a width equal to that of the driveway.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the proposed project as submitted
to the Planning Commission.
Design Review Committee Action:
Staff Planner: Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner
Members Present:
Staff Coordinator: Mike Smith, Principal Planner
Page 20Page200
lqw- Design Review Committee Meeting
AGENDA
February 2, 2021
MINUTES
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
7:00 p.m.
A. Call to Order
The meeting of the Design Review Committee was held on February 2, 2021. The meeting was called to
order by Mike Smith, Staff Coordinator, at 7:00pm.
Design Review Committee members present: Francisco Oaxaca, Diane Williams, Mike Smith.
Staff Present: Sean McPherson, Senior Planner; and Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner.
B. Public Communications
Mike Smith opened the public communication and, after noting there were no public comments, closed
public communications.
C. Consent Calendar
C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of January 19, 2021.
Motion by Oaxaca, second by Williams. Motion carried 3-0 to adopt the minutes as presented.
D. Project Review Items
D1. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00766 - 11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC - A request to construct a
159,580 square -foot industrial/warehouse building on a vacant 7.39-acre parcel within the
Minimum Impact/Heavy Industrial (MI/HI) District, located at the northwest corner of Jersey
Boulevard and Milliken Avenue - APN: 0229-111-60. Staff is preparing an Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration.
Staff presented the project to the Design Review Committee. Commissioners Williams and
Oaxaca liked that the building looks like an office building and expressed support for the design.
The Committee voted to advance the project to the full Planning Commission.
The Committee took the following action:
is Recommend approval to PC/PD.
D2. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2020-00177 - KIMLEY-HORN FOR HILLWOOD DEVELOPMENT
CO. - A request for site plan and architectural design for the development of two industrial
warehouse buildings, parking, and landscape improvements on vacant parcels located east of
Etiwanda Avenue on the north of Napa Street; APN: 0229-291-54 and -46. An Environmental
Impact Report is being prepared for this project.
Page 21Page201
Staff provided a powerpoint presentation providing the facts of the project relative to the Design
Review Committee's review. At the end of the presentation, staff noted that there were two
items for which staff sought the DRCs input (employee break area in front setback, and chain -
link fence along existing rail spur). In addition, the project applicant also expressed concerns
regarding the relocation of an existing Southern California Edison (SCE) easement and related
infrastructure,
First, the project plans illustrated an employee break area shelter structure within the front
setback. Staff noted that structures are not permitted within the 25-foot front yard setback.
Discussion ensued on this item, with input from the applicant and applicant's architect.
Committee members Oaxaca and Williams both suggested that the applicant work with staff to
relocate the structure outside of the front setback. The applicant and applicant's architect
indicated that they would relocate the structure outside of the front setback.
Second, staff solicited the opinion of DRC members related to the proposed construction of a
chain -link fence along the existing rail spur, behind the front setback, and not visible from the
public right-of-way. Both Committee members Oaxaca and Williams indicated that a chain -link
fence in this location did not present a concern, provided that the fencing include slats for
screening as required by the Development Code.
Commissioner Oaxaca asked about the applicant's concerns related to the relocation of the
SCE easement and related infrastructure. Staff members Smith and McPherson both respond
stating that this was not a topic related to the Design Review Committee's purview, adding that
this will be discussed with the full Planning Commission. No, other discussion was held on this
item. Lastly, Commissioner Oaxaca asked staff to explain the annexation process relative to
this project. Staff member Smith briefly highlighted the annexation process in general terms
and concluded remarks by stating that this topic too would be discussed in detail with the full
Planning Commission.
The Committee took the following action:
AN Recommend approval to PC/PD.
E. Adjournment
Meeting was adjourned at 8:05pm.
Respectfully submitted,
0
1
abeth Thornhill
Executive Assistant, Planning Department
Approved: DRC meeting February 16, 2021
Design Review Committee Regular Meeting Minutes — February 2, 2021
Page 2 of 2
FINAL Page 22Page202
Exhibit G – Environmental Impact Report
Due to file size, this attachment can be accessed through the following link:
https://www.dropbox.com/home/CEQA%20Documents%20Available%20for%20Review/Jersey%20an
d%20Milliken%20Warehouse?preview=Appendix+G+-+Phase+II+Investigation+(1).pdf
Exhibit G Page 23Page203
FINAL
Jersey Industrial Complex Project
Environmental Impact Report
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCH No. 2021060608
Prepared for:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Contact: Vincent Acuna
Prepared by:
Birdseye Planning Group, LLC
P.O.Box 1956, Vista, CA 92085
Contact: Ryan Birdseye
January 2022
Exhibit H Page 24Page204
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 25Page205
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
SECTION 1. Authority ................................................................................................................. 1
SECTION 2. Monitoring Schedule ............................................................................................. 1
SECTION 3. Support Documentation ........................................................................................ 2
SECTION 4. Format of Mitigation Monitoring Matrix ............................................................... 2
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ................................................. 3
Page 26Page206
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 ii
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 27Page207
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
SECTION 1. Authority
This environmental Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Program) has been prepared
pursuant to §21081.6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code
§21000 et seq.), and CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. §15000 et seq.) §§15091(d) and
15097, to ensure implementation of and provide for the monitoring of mitigation measures
required of the Jersey Industrial Complex Project (Project), as set forth in the Final Environmental
Impact Report (FEIR) prepared for the Project. This report will be kept on file in the offices of the
CEQA Lead Agency, the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City).
The EIR addresses the potential environmental impacts of the Project, and, where appropriate,
recommends mitigation measures to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental
impacts. The Program detailed in the matrix table below is designed to monitor and ensure
implementation of all mitigation measures that are adopted for the Project.
The City is the Lead Agency for the Project and assumes ultimate enforcement responsibilities
for implementation of all mitigation measures listed in this Program. The City may assign
responsibility for implementation or monitoring to appropriate designees such as a construction
manager or third-party monitor. However, as the Lead Agency, the City remains responsible for
ensuring that implementation of the mitigation measures occurs in accordance with this Program.
In some cases, the City is required to secure permits or approvals from third-party agencies in
order to implement a mitigation measure. In these cases, the City is responsible for verifying that
such permits or approvals have been obtained in accordance with the conditions stipulated in the
mitigation measure. The City’s existing planning, engineering, operations, and procurement
review and inspection processes will be used as the basic foundation for the Program procedures
and will also serve to provide the documentation for the reporting program.
SECTION 2. Monitoring Schedule
Prior to construction, while detailed design plans are being prepared by City staff or its agents,
City staff will be responsible for ensuring compliance with mitigation monitoring applicable to the
Project construction, development, and design phases. Once construction has begun and is
underway, monitoring of the mitigation measures associated with construction will be included in
the responsibilities of City staff, who shall prepare or cause to be prepared periodic monitoring
reports, as appropriate. Regulatory agencies will have to harmonize CEQA mitigation with
regulatory permit conditions and monitoring/reporting as part of the regulatory permitting process
and will likely require submittal of formal monitoring reports. Once construction has been
completed, the City will monitor the Project as specified in the mitigation measures.
Page 28Page208
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 2
SECTION 3. Support Documentation
Findings and related documentation supporting the findings involving modifications to mitigation
measures shall be maintained in the Project file with the Program and shall be made available to
the public upon request.
SECTION 4. Format of Mitigation Monitoring Matrix
The mitigation monitoring matrix on the following pages identifies the environmental issue areas
for which monitoring is required, the required mitigation measures, the time frame for monitoring,
and the responsible implementing and monitoring agencies.
Page 29Page209
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 3
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
AIR QUALITY
AQ-1: Condition project to overlap architectural coating phase with the
building phase by approximately 44 total workdays to avoid exceeding the
daily ROG standard. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant
shall submit a detailed construction schedule to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga which demonstrates that the architectural coating phase will
overlap with the building phase by a minimum of 44 days.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to issuance of
building permits
Plan check
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
BIO-1: Pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and Fish and
Game Code, removal of any trees, shrubs, or any other potential nesting
habitat should be conducted outside the avian nesting season. The nesting
season extends from February 1 through August 31 but can vary slightly
from year to year based upon seasonal weather conditions. If ground
disturbance and vegetation removal cannot occur outside of the nesting
season, a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds, shall be
conducted by a qualified biologist within three (3) days of the start of any
ground disturbing activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed
during construction.
If an active avian nest is discovered during the pre-construction clearance
survey, construction activities can commence thereafter provided activities
are able to maintain a 300-foot buffer around the active nest. For raptors
and special-status species, this buffer will be expanded to 500 feet. A
biological monitor shall be present during construction activities within the
buffer area. to delineate the boundaries of the buffers and to monitor the
active nest to ensure that nesting behavior is not adversely affected by the
construction activity.
If the biologist determines that bird breeding activity is being disrupted, the
Project Applicant shall stop work, notify the City and coordinate with the
USFWS and CDFW to agree upon an avoidance/minimization approach.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to grading
permit and/or
construction permit
issuance; during
grading, excavation
and construction
activities, upon
completion of
monitoring
activities, and prior
to final engineering
inspection.
On-site inspection,
separate submittal
Page 30Page210
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 4
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
Upon agreement of the avoidance/ minimization approach, work may
resume subject to the revisions and continued monitoring.
If burrowing owls are detected on-site during the clearance survey, in
conformance with the California Staff Report’s protocols, no ground-
disturbing activities will be permitted within 656 feet of an occupied burrow
during the breeding season (February 1 to August 31), unless otherwise
authorized by CDFW.
Once the qualified biologist has determined the young have fledged and left
the nest of any birds within the buffer area(s), or the nest otherwise
becomes inactive under natural conditions, normal construction activities
can occur.
Reporting. If no active nests are found during the pre-construction
clearance survey, the Project Applicant shall submit to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga a brief letter report prepared by the biologist that documents
the negative survey results. The letter report shall also indicate that no
impacts to active avian nests will occur.
If active nests were found, the Project Applicant shall submit a final bird
survey monitoring report prepared by the project biologist to the City, the
USFWS and CDFW. The report shall include documentation of all bird
surveys, monitoring activities, coordination efforts with the wildlife agencies,
as-built construction drawings with an overlay of any active nests in the
survey areas, photographs of habitat areas during pre-construction and
post-construction conditions, and other relevant summary information
documenting that authorized impacts were not exceeded and that general
compliance was achieved for the avoidance/minimization provisions and the
biological monitoring program required by the wildlife agencies.
Page 31Page211
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 5
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
CULTURAL RESOURCES
CUL-1: 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 SMBMI Cultural Resources
Department shall be contacted, as detailed within TCR-1, regarding any
pre-contact and/or historic-era 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.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to issuance of
grading
permit/during
grading and
construction
Plan check,
separate submittal
CUL-2: If significant pre-contact and/or historic-era 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.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
During grading and
construction
On-site inspection,
separate submittal
CUL-3: 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. If the human remains are
determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the Native American
Heritage Commission, which will determine and notify a Most Likely
Descendant. The Most Likely Descendant shall complete the inspection of
the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific
removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items
associated with Native American burials.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to issuance of
grading
permit/during
grading and
construction
Plan check,
separate submittal
Page 32Page212
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 6
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
TCR-1: The SMBMI Cultural Resources Department shall be contacted, as
detailed in Mitigation Measure CUL-1, of any pre-contact and/or historic-era
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 resource
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.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to issuance of
grading
permit/during
grading and
construction
Plan check,
separate submittal
TCR-2: 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.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
During grading and
construction
Separate submittal
TCR-3: The Project Applicant shall be required to retain and compensate
for the services of a Tribal monitor/consultant who is both approved by the
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation Tribal Government and is
listed under the NAHC’s Tribal Contact list for the area of the Project
location. This list is provided by the NAHC. The monitor/consultant will only
be present on-site during the construction phases that involve ground
disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined by the
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that may
include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, pot-holing or auguring,
grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching,
within the Project area. The Tribal Monitor/consultant will complete daily
monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including
construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified.
The on-site monitoring shall end when the Project site grading and
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to issuance of
grading
permit/during
grading and
construction
On-site inspection,
other agency
permit/approval
Page 33Page213
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 7
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and
monitor/consultant have indicated that the site has a low potential for
impacting Tribal Cultural Resources.
TCR-4: Upon discovery of any archaeological resources, cease
construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can
be assessed. All archaeological resources unearthed by project
construction activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and
tribal monitor/consultant approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission
Indians-Kizh Nation. If the resources are Native American in origin, the
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation shall coordinate with the
landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically,
the Tribe will request reburial or preservation for educational purposes.
Work may continue on other parts of the Project while evaluation and, if
necessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA Guidelines Section15064.5 [f]). If
a resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a
“historical resource” or “unique archaeological resource”, time allotment and
funding sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidance measures, or
appropriate mitigation, must be available. The treatment plan established
for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5(f) for historical resources.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
During grading and
construction
On-site inspection,
other agency
permit/approval
TCR-5: Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of
treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include
implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to remove the
resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. Any
historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be
curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the
materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or
the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If
no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be offered to a
local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
During grading and
construction
Onsite inspection,
other agency
permit/approval
Page 34Page214
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 8
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
TCR-6: Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1)
as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or
skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in
PRC 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute. Health and
Safety Code 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material
shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and excavation halted
until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner
recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has
reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall
contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) and PRC 5097.98 shall be followed.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
During grading and
construction
On-site inspection,
other agency
permit/approval
Page 35Page215
RESOLUTION NO. 22-001
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH No. 2021060608) PREPARED
FOR THE 11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC PROJECT WHICH PROPOSES TO
CONSTRUCT A 159,580 SQUARE-FOOT INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE
BUILDING ON A VACANT 7.39-ACRE PARCEL WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL
EMPLOYMENT (IE) DISTRICT, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER
OF JERSEY BOULEVARD AND MILLIKEN AVENUE - APN: 0229-111-60,
MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT, AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM
A.Recitals.
1.11298 Jersey Blvd, LLC filed a development application for Design Review (DRC2019-
00766) for a development project as described in the title of this Resolution (the “Project”).
2.In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State
CEQA Guidelines, the City concluded that there was substantial evidence that the Project might
have a significant environmental impact on several resources and determined that an EIR must
be prepared for the Project in order to analyze the Project’s potential impacts on the environment.
3.Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15082, on June 28, 2021, the City published a
Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft EIR for the Project, and circulated the NOP and initial study
to the Office of Planning and Research, the County Clerk, responsible and trustee agencies,
governmental agencies, organizations, and persons who may be interested in the application for
a 30-day public review period.
4.The City received comments from the Native American Heritage Commission in
response to the NOP.
5.After providing notice to the required tribes under AB 52, the City received comments
from the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians and the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh
Nation in accordance with the City’s obligations under AB 52.
6.The City released the Draft EIR for a 45-day public review period beginning November
12, 2021 and ending on December 27, 2021. During the public review period the City received a
total of 2 comment letters on the Draft EIR that required a response, and the City has prepared
response to each comment.
7.The EIR concludes that with the inclusion of mitigation measures, the Project will not
have a significant impact on any environmental resources.
8.The City prepared a Final EIR in accordance with CEQA, which contains the City’s
responses to comments, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Project,
the Draft EIR as modified by the Final EIR, and all appendices.
Exhibit I
Page 36Page216
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2022-001
11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC FINAL EIR CERTIFICATION AND CEQA FINDINGS
February 9, 2022
Page 2
9.On February 9, 2022, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing to consider the Project and concluded the hearing on that date.
10.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. Recitals. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in
the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Findings. Based upon the information and evidence set forth in the Final EIR,
together with its appendices, and all other available evidence presented to the Planning
Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on February 9, 2022, including written
and oral staff reports and public testimony, the Planning Commission hereby specifically finds as
follows:
a.Agencies and interested members of the public have been afforded due
notice and an opportunity to comment on the EIR and the Project.
b.Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that the City, before
approving the Project, make one or more of the following written findings for each significant effect
identified in the Final EIR accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding:
i.Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into,
the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in
the Final EIR;
ii.Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and
jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have
been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency; or
iii.Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make
infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.
These required findings are set forth in the attached Exhibit A and incorporated
herein by this reference.
c.Environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR that are found to be less
than significant and do not require mitigation are described in Section 4 of Exhibit A, attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
d.Environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR as potentially significant,
but that can be reduced to less than significant levels with mitigation, are described in Section 5
of Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
Page 37Page217
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2022-001
11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC FINAL EIR CERTIFICATION AND CEQA FINDINGS
February 9, 2022
Page 3
e. No environmental impacts were identified in the Final EIR as significant and
unavoidable despite the imposition of all feasible mitigation measures, and a statement further
confirming this conclusion is provided in Section 6 of Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference.
f. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 and Public Resources Code
Section 21081.6 requires the City to prepare and adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting
program for any project for which mitigation measures have been imposed to assure compliance
with the adopted mitigation measures. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is
attached hereto as Exhibit B and is hereby incorporated herein by reference. Further, the
mitigation measures set forth therein are made applicable to the Project.
g. Prior to taking action on the Final EIR and approving the Project, the
Planning Commission specifically finds and certifies that: (1) the Final EIR was presented to the
Planning Commission; (2) the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the Final EIR and
all of the information and data in the administrative record, and all oral and written testimony
presented to it during meetings and hearings; (3) the Final EIR is adequate and has been
completed in full compliance with CEQA; and (4) the Final EIR reflects the Planning Commission’s
independent judgment and analysis.
h. No comments or any additional information submitted to the City have
produced any substantial new information requiring additional recirculation or additional
environmental review of the Project under CEQA.
3. Determination. On the basis of the foregoing and all of the evidence in the
administrative record before it, the Planning Commission hereby certifies the Final EIR, adopts
findings pursuant to the CEQA as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein
by reference, and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) attached
hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference.
4. Location of Record. The documents and other materials, including the staff
reports, technical studies, appendices, plans, and specifications, that constitute the record on
which this Resolution is based are located in the Planning Department and are in the custody of
the Planning Director, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730. All such
documents are incorporated herein by reference.
5. Certification. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of
this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Bryan Dopp, Chairman
Page 38Page218
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2022-001
11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC FINAL EIR CERTIFICATION AND CEQA FINDINGS
February 9, 2022
Page 4
ATTEST:
Matthew R. Burris, AICP, LEED, AP, Secretary
I, Matthew R. Burris, AICP, LEED, AP, 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 9th day of February
2022, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Page 39Page219
CANDIDATE FINDINGS OF FACT
for
Jersey Industrial Complex Project
SCH No. 2021060608
Prepared for:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Contact: Vincent Acuna
Prepared by:
Birdseye Planning Group, LLC
P.O. Box 1956, Vista, CA 92085
Contact: Ryan Birdseye
January 2022
Page 40Page220
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 41Page221
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 i
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................1
1.1. Purpose .................................................................................................................. 1
1.2. Records of Proceedings ......................................................................................... 3
1.3. Custodian and Location of Records ....................................................................... 4
1.4. CEQA Findings of Independent Judgment, Review and Analysis ........................... 4
SECTION 2. GENERAL CEQA FINDINGS ..........................................................................................4
SECTION 3. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS DETERMINED TO HAVE NO IMPACT5
3.1. Aesthetics ............................................................................................................... 6
3.2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources ....................................................................... 6
3.3. Biological Resources .............................................................................................. 7
3.4. Cultural Resources ................................................................................................. 9
3.5. Energy .................................................................................................................... 9
3.6. Geology and Soils ................................................................................................... 9
3.7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................................................................... 10
3.8. Hydrology and Water Quality .............................................................................. 12
3.9. Land Use and Planning ......................................................................................... 12
3.10. Mineral Resources ............................................................................................... 13
3.11. Noise .................................................................................................................... 14
3.12. Population and Housing ....................................................................................... 14
3.13. Public Services ..................................................................................................... 14
3.14. Recreation ............................................................................................................ 15
3.15. Transportation/Traffic ......................................................................................... 15
3.16. Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................... 16
3.17. Wildfire ................................................................................................................ 16
SECTION 4. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOUND TO BE LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT (NO MITIGATION REQUIRED) ............................................................... 17
4.1. Aesthetics ............................................................................................................. 17
4.2. Air Quality ............................................................................................................ 18
4.3. Energy .................................................................................................................. 19
Page 42Page222
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 ii
4.4. Geology and Soils ................................................................................................. 19
4.5. Greenhouse Gas Emissions .................................................................................. 21
4.6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................................................................... 21
4.7. Hydrology and Water Quality .............................................................................. 22
4.8. Noise .................................................................................................................... 23
4.9. Public Services ..................................................................................................... 24
4.10. Transportation/Traffic ......................................................................................... 24
4.11. Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................... 25
4.12. Wildfire ................................................................................................................ 26
SECTION 5. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOUND TO BE LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED ..................................................... 27
5.1. Air Quality ............................................................................................................ 27
5.2. Biological Resources ............................................................................................ 29
5.3. Cultural Resources ............................................................................................... 31
5.4. Tribal Cultural Resources ..................................................................................... 33
SECTION 6. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT .......................... 36
6.1. Alternatives Considered and Rejected ................................................................ 36
6.2. Alternative Sites ................................................................................................... 37
6.3. Alternatives Selected for Further Analysis .......................................................... 37
SECTION 7. GENERAL CEQA FINDINGS ........................................................................................ 42
SECTION 8. FINDINGS REGARDING CIRCULATION ........................................................................ 44
SECTION 9. LEGAL EFFECTS OF FINDINGS .................................................................................... 45
Page 43Page223
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 1
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION
This statement of Findings of Fact (Findings) addresses the environmental effects associated
with the proposed Jersey Industrial Complex Project (Project), as described in the Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). These Findings are made pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code [PRC] § 21000 et seq.),
specifically PRC §§ 21081, 21081.5, and 21081.6, and the CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code
of Regulations [CCR] 15000 et seq.), specifically §§ 15091 and 15093. The Draft EIR (DEIR)
examined the full range of potential effects of construction and operation of the Project and
identified standard mitigation practices that could be employed to reduce, minimize, or avoid
those potential effects.
In accordance with, and in furtherance of the mandates contained in California Public Resources
Code Section 21002 and related case law, the Project design reflects the identification and
implementation of feasible mitigation measures to lessen identified environmental impacts, and
the FEIR presented information on the environmental effects of the Project, including effects that
are mitigated to below a level of significance.
1.1. Purpose
PRC § 21081, and CEQA Guidelines § 15091 require that the lead agency, in this case the City
of Rancho Cucamonga (City), prepare written findings for identified significant effects,
accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. PRC § 21081(a) affirmatively
requires a lead agency make one or more of three possible findings in reference to each
significant impact. In addition, PRC § 21081(b) requires an additional finding for impacts that
include specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other considerations wherein the lead
agency affirms that the project benefits outweigh the environmental impacts.
CEQA Guidelines § 15091 states, in part, that:
a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been
certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project
unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those
significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding.
The possible findings are:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified
in the final EIR.
2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been
adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
Page 44Page224
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 2
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make
infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
In accordance with PRC § 21081, and CEQA Guidelines § 15093 (Statement of Overriding
Conditions [SOC]), whenever significant effects cannot be mitigated to below a level of
significance, the decision‐making agency is required to balance, as applicable, the benefits of
the project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the
project. If the benefits of a project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the
adverse effects may be considered “acceptable.” In that case, the decision-making agency may
prepare and adopt an SOC, pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines.
Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines provides:
a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic,
legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its
unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If
the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed
project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse
environmental effects may be considered "acceptable."
b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of
significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or
substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support
its action based on the FEIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of
overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.
c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be
included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice
of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to,
findings required pursuant to Section 15091.
The FEIR identified potentially significant effects that could result from the project. The City finds
that the inclusion of feasible mitigation measures as part of the approval of the Project will reduce
all of those effects to less-than‐significant levels.
As required by CEQA, the City, in adopting these Findings, also adopts a Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Project. The City finds that the MMRP, which is
incorporated by reference and made a part of these Findings, meets the requirements of PRC
§ 21081.6, by providing for the implementation and monitoring of measures intended to mitigate
potentially significant effects of the Project.
In accordance with the CEQA Statutes and Guidelines, the City adopts these Findings for the
Project. Pursuant to PRC § 21082.1(c)(3), the City also finds that these Findings reflect the City’s
Page 45Page225
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 3
independent judgment as the lead agency for the Project (see Findings Section 1.4, CEQA
Findings of Independent Judgment, Review and Analysis).
1.2. Records of Proceedings
For the purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the record of proceedings for the Project includes
all data and materials outlined in PRC § 21167.6(e), along with other Project-relevant information
contained within the City’s files. Specifically, the record of proceedings for the City’s decision on
the Project includes the following documents, all of which are incorporated by reference and are
relied on in supporting these Findings:
• The Notice of Preparation (NOP) and all other public notices issued by the City in
conjunction with the Project.
• All written comments submitted by agencies, organizations, or members of the public
during the public review comment period on the NOP.
• The DEIR for the Project and all technical appendices, technical memoranda and
documents relied upon or incorporated by reference.
• All written comments submitted by agencies, organizations, or members of the public
during the public review comment period on the DEIR and the City’s responses to those
comments, including related referenced technical materials and DEIR errata.
• The FEIR for the Project.
• The MMRP for the Project.
• All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents relating
to the Project prepared by the City or consultants to the City with respect to the City’s
compliance with the requirements of CEQA and with respect to the City’s action on the
Project.
• All documents submitted to the City by other public agencies or members of the public in
connection with the DEIR.
• Any minutes and/or verbatim transcripts of all information sessions, public meetings, and
public hearings held by the City in connection with the Project.
• Any documentary or other evidence submitted to the City at such information sessions,
public meetings, and public hearings.
• All resolutions adopted by the City regarding the Project, and all staff reports, analyses,
and summaries related to the adoption of those resolutions.
• Matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to federal, state, and
local laws and regulations.
• Any documents expressly cited in these Findings, in addition to those cited above, and
any other materials required for the record of proceedings by PRC § 21167.6(e).
Page 46Page226
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 4
1.3. Custodian and Location of Records
The documents and other materials that, as a whole, make up the Record of Proceedings for the
City’s actions related to the Project are located at the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning
Department, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. The City, as the
lead agency for the Project, is the custodian of the Record of Proceedings for the Project.
1.4. CEQA Findings of Independent Judgment, Review and Analysis
Under CEQA, the lead agency must (1) independently review and analyze the EIR; (2) circulate
draft documents that reflect its independent judgment; (3) as part of the certification of an EIR,
find that the report or declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and (4)
submit copies of the documents to the State Clearinghouse if there is state agency involvement
or if the project is of statewide, regional, or area-wide significance (PRC § 21082.1[c]).
The Findings contained in this document reflect the City’s conclusions, as required pursuant to
CEQA, for the Project. The City has exercised independent judgment, in accordance with PRC
§ 21082.1(c)(3), in the preparation of the EIR. The review, analysis and revision material
prepared by the Project Applicant and its consultants, and the review, analysis, and revision of
the EIR based on comments received during the public comment process.
Having received, reviewed, and considered the information in the FEIR, as well as any and all
other information in the record, the City hereby makes these Findings pursuant to and in
accordance with PRC §§ 21081, 21081.5, and 21081.6.
SECTION 2. GENERAL CEQA FINDINGS
Pursuant to PRC § 21081 and CEQA Guidelines § 15091, no public agency shall approve or
carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant
effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out unless the
public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant impact:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which
mitigates or avoid the significant effects on the environment. [referred to in these Findings
as “Finding 1”].
2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency. [referred to
in these Findings as “Finding 2”].
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other consideration, including
considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers,
make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental
impact report. (The concept of infeasibility also encompasses whether a particular
alternative or mitigation measure promotes the Project’s underlying goals and objectives,
Page 47Page227
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 5
and whether an alternative or mitigation measure is impractical or undesirable from a
policy standpoint. See, California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177
Cal. App. 4th 957; City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal. App.3d 410).
[referred to in these Findings as “Finding 3”].
The City has made one or more of the required written findings for each significant impact
associated with the Project. Those written findings, along with a presentation of facts in support
of each of the written findings, are presented below. The City certifies these findings are based
on full appraisal of all viewpoints, including all comments received up to the date of adoption of
these findings, concerning the environmental issues identified and discussed.
The mitigation measures adopted as part of the Project are feasible and mitigate the
environmental impacts to the maximum extent feasible and possible as discussed in the findings
made below. The FEIR includes minor clarifications to the DEIR. These changes made to the
DEIR are shown in the FEIR in response to individual comments and are shown in strikethrough
and underline text.
Thus, it is the finding of the City that such clarifying changes as described in the FEIR, do not
present any new, significant information requiring recirculation or additional environmental review
under PRC § 21092.1 and CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5.
A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MRP for the Project has been adopted pursuant
to the requirements of PRC § 21081.6 to ensure implementation of the adopted mitigation
measures to reduce significant effects on the environment and is included in the FEIR document.
The City is the custodian of the documents and other material that constitute the record of the
proceedings upon which certification of the FEIR for the Project is based, as described above in
Section 1.3, Custodian and Location of Records.
It is the finding of the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s City Council that the FEIR, as presented for
review and approval, fulfills environmental review requirements for the Project, and that the
document constitutes a complete, accurate, adequate, and good faith effort at full disclosure
under CEQA, and reflects the independent judgment of the City.
SECTION 3. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
DETERMINED TO HAVE NO IMPACT
For the following significance thresholds, the City finds that, based upon substantial evidence in
the record, the proposed Project would have no impact; therefore, no mitigation is required, and
no significant, unavoidable adverse impacts would occur.
Page 48Page228
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 6
3.1. Aesthetics
Significance Threshold: Would the project substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings along a scenic highway?
Basis of Conclusion: There are no state or County eligible or designated state scenic highways
in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest officially designated scenic highway is State
Route (SR) 2 (Angeles Crest Scenic Highway), located on the north side of the San Gabriel
Mountains and approximately 12 miles from the northern City boundary. No scenic resources are
located within or adjacent to the project site. Given the distance between the Project Site and the
nearest officially designated state scenic highways, the proposed Project would not substantially
damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway. Therefore, no impacts to scenic resources would be
anticipated.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-4.
3.2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Significance Threshold: Would the project 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?
Basis of Conclusion: According to the California Department of Conservation’s California
Important Farmland Finder, the proposed Project site does not contain Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, or Farmland of Local Importance. The site is
classified as “Urban and Built-Up Land” by the Farmland Finder. The Project site does not contain
Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. No impact to these
resources would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-5 through 5-6.
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use or a Williamson Act contract?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is zoned MI/HI and designated Heavy Industrial in the
General Plan Update (2010). The Heavy Industrial designation permits heavy manufacturing,
compounding, processing or fabrication, warehousing, storage, freight handling, and truck
services and terminals, as well as supportive service commercial uses. This district is intended
for Industrial use. Additionally, the Project site is not enrolled in a Williamson Act contract. As a
Page 49Page229
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 7
result, no impacts related to conflicts with agricultural zoning or a Williamson act contract would
occur. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-6.
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in PRC Section 12220(g))
or timberland (as defined in PRC Section 4526), or timberland
zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
Basis of Conclusion: Neither the Project site nor surrounding areas are zoned for forest use or
timber production. The site has not been used for timber production or commercial agriculture.
The Project would not conflict with any zoning designations designed to preserve timber or
agricultural resources. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-6.
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Basis of Conclusion: There is no forest land on or in the vicinity of the proposed Project site.
The Project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest
use. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-6.
Significance Threshold: Would the project involve other changes in the existing
environment that, due to their location or nature, could
individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland to
nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
Basis of Conclusion: There is no farmland or forest land located within or near the proposed
Project site. The Project would not involve any changes that could result in the loss or conversion
of farmland or forest land to other uses. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-6.
3.3. Biological Resources
Significance Threshold: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
Page 50Page230
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 8
or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site does not support riparian habitat; United States Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), or Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) jurisdictional areas; wetlands; or, sensitive natural
communities. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-7.
Significance Threshold: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state
or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site does not support riparian habitat; non-wetland
jurisdictional resources; wetlands; or, sensitive natural communities. Therefore, no impact would
occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-7.
Significance Threshold: Would the project 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?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is isolated from regional wildlife corridors and linkages,
and there are no riparian corridors, creeks, or useful patches of steppingstone habitat (natural
areas) within or connecting the Project site to any identified wildlife corridors or linkages. No
impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-7.
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site does not contain any trees that would qualify as Heritage
Trees under the City’s Municipal Code and no street trees would be removed during site
preparation. Further, there are no Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community
Conservation Plans that are applicable to the area. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-8.
Page 51Page231
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 9
Significance Threshold: Impact - Would the project conflict with the provisions of an
adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community
conservation plan, or any other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is not within an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan;
Natural Communities Conservation Plan; or other approved local, regional, or State habitat
conservation plan area. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not conflict with the
provisions of an adopted plan and no impacts would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-8.
3.4. Cultural Resources
Significance Threshold: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site has not been developed; thus, there are no structures or
other features that may be determined a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
§15064.5. No recorded resources are located within the area of potential effect (APE). The
Project site is not part of a historic district nor would historic resources be affected by the Project.
No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-53.
3.5. Energy
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-9.
3.6. Geology and Soils
Significance Threshold: Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death from landslides?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site does not exhibit sloped conditions, adverse geologic
conditions, or weak earth materials and is not at risk for seismic induced landslides. The Project
would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of loss, injury, or death involving landslides. No impact would occur.
Page 52Page232
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 10
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-9.
Significance Threshold: Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of
the UBC (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to
life or property?
Basis of Conclusion: As stated in the General Plan EIR, Section 4.7, Geology/Soils, expansive
soils are soils with a significant amount of clay particles that have the ability to shrink or swell
with water. When these soils swell, they exert pressure on building foundations and may cause
damage. Soils in the City of Rancho Cucamonga and its sphere of influence have relatively low
amounts of clay and no soil expansion hazards are present No impact would occur related to
expansive soils.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-64.
Significance Threshold: Would the project have soils that are incapable of supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
Basis of Conclusion: No septic tanks or alternative wastewater systems will be constructed as
part of the proposed Project and no impacts will occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-9.
3.7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Significance Threshold: Would the project be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous material 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?
Basis of Conclusion: Slag fill material was identified on the site that was determined to be
hazardous. The site was remediated consistent with the Phase II Investigation and Remediation
Plan; however, no state or local CUPA oversight occurred. As referenced in the Site Remediation
Report (July 2020), a total of 12,364 tons of hazardous material was removed from the site and
disposed of at the La Paz County landfill, Arizona. Based on the amount of material excavated
and properly disposed of offsite, visual evidence and verification sampling of remaining soils, it
was concluded that constituents within the soil remaining on-site are below the agreed upon
Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) regulatory cleanup levels.
The Project site is not on the Cortese list, nor on databases maintained by either the DTSC or
the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Further, there are no Cortese listed sites
located in proximity to the Project site. The Project is not located on a site included on a list
Page 53Page233
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 11
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. No impact would occur and no
mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-10 through 5-11.
Significance Threshold: Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within ¼ mile of an existing or proposed school?
Basis of Conclusion: No existing or proposed schools are located within one-quarter mile of
the Project site. The nearest school to the Project site is the Rancho Cucamonga Middle School
which is located at 10022 Feron Boulevard in Rancho Cucamonga approximately 2.6 miles west
of the site. Cucamonga Elementary School is located at 8677 Archibald Avenue approximately
2.9 miles west of the site. Accordingly, the Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-10.
Significance Threshold: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project result in
a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project
area?
Basis of Conclusion: Ontario International Airport is located approximately 3.8 miles southwest
of the Project site. The proposed Project is located within the Airport Influence Area and Airport
Land Use Compatibility Zone E as shown in the Ontario Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
(ALUCP) Map 2-. There are no specific land use constraints within Zone E that would apply to
the Project. The proposed Project would not result in a safety concern for people residing in
proximity to Ontario International Airport. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-10.
Significance Threshold: Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
Basis of Conclusion: The proposed Project would not obstruct access to the Project vicinity
through road closures or other project actions that could impact evacuation routes or otherwise
impair evacuation during emergencies. Access to areas surrounding the site via Milliken Avenue
and Jersey Boulevard would be maintained. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-10.
Page 54Page234
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 12
Significance Threshold: Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland
fires?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is not located within a designated fire hazard area or a
Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone within a Local Responsibility Area. The Project would not
expose people or structures to a significant risk associated with wildland fires. No impact would
occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-10.
3.8. Hydrology and Water Quality
Significance Threshold: Would the project, in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is not within a 100-year flood zone, is not within a tsunami
zone, and is not within proximity to an enclosed or partially enclosed body of water that is capable
of producing seiches. Therefore, there would be no impact related to risk of release of pollutants
due to inundation of the Project site from a flood, tsunami or seiche.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-101.
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of
a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is within the Santa Ana River Basin and the Project would
not conflict with the Santa Ana Basin Plan. Additionally, the Project would be consistent with the
City of Rancho Cucamonga MS4 Permit. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-101 through 4-102.
3.9. Land Use and Planning
Significance Threshold: Would the project physically divide an established
community?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is surrounded by warehouse/industrial uses to the north,
east and west and Fire Station #174 and training facility to the south. The proposed Project would
utilize the existing road network and not result in the construction of improvements that would
physically divide an existing community or otherwise impact circulation on public roads
surrounding the site. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-12.
Page 55Page235
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 13
Significance Threshold: Would the project cause a significant environmental impact
due to conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
Basis of Conclusion: Implementation of the Project would not result in conflicts with any local
or regional land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect. The Project is consistent with the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan
(2010) and Zoning Code. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-12 through 5-13.
3.10. Mineral Resources
Significance Threshold: Would the project 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?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is not part of an area known to have significant local
sand and gravel resources. As stated in the General Plan EIR, the mineral resources are primarily
sand and gravel deposits within the alluvial fans in and near Lytle Creek (San Sevaine Wash and
Etiwanda Creek), San Antonio Creek, Cucamonga Creek, Deer Creek, and Day Creek. These
alluvial fans generally start at the canyons at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains, north of the
City. While the northern portion of these fans remain undeveloped, the creeks have been
channelized in and near the City of Rancho Cucamonga and in developed areas along creeks.
Implementation of the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region or to the residents of the State of California. No
impact would result.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-13.
Significance Threshold: Would the project 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?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is not located in an area of known sand and gravel
deposits and is not identified in the General Plan as a locally-important mineral resource recovery
site. Implementation of the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region or to the residents of the State of California. No
impact would result.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-13.
Page 56Page236
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 14
3.11. Noise
Significance Threshold: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or
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?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is located approximately 3.8 miles northwest of Ontario
International Airport. There are no private airstrips in proximity to the site. The proposed Project
is located within the Airport Influence Area and Airport Land Use Compatibility Zone E as shown
in the Ontario ALUCP Map 2-1. No airport noise limits are associated with Zone E. No impact
would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-14.
3.12. Population and Housing
Significance Threshold: Would the project induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new
homes and business) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not construct housing, nor would it extend roads or
other infrastructure into previously unserved areas. Thus, the Project would not directly or
indirectly induce population growth. No impact related to unplanned population growth would
result from Project implementation.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-14.
Significance Threshold: Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Basis of Conclusion: Construction of the proposed Project would not require the removal of
existing housing; and thus, would not result in the displacement of people or require the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-14.
3.13. Public Services
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities or a need for new or physically
Page 57Page237
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 15
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
including other public facilities?
v.) Other Public Facilities:
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not increase the population of Rancho Cucamonga or
otherwise affect demand for library services. No new or expanded library services would be
required. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-16.
3.14. Recreation
Significance Threshold: Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood
and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project does not propose any uses that would directly generate a
population that would increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities. The Project would not add additional residences or business that would
increase demand for any park or other recreational facility in the area. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-16 through 5-17.
Significance Threshold: Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might
have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Basis of Conclusion: No additional park land would be required to accommodate the Project,
nor would staff contribute to an exceedance of the capacity of existing park capacity. The
payment of impact fees by the Project applicant, if required, would contribute to funding available
for improvements to existing park resources. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-17.
3.15. Transportation/Traffic
Significance Threshold: Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Page 58Page238
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 16
Basis of Conclusion: Road improvements would be limited to the driveways on the south and
east side of the Project site and would be constructed consistent with Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Code. The Project would not increase hazards caused by a design feature or
incompatible use. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-17.
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not alter emergency access routes. The road
improvements would be constructed consistent with Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to
ensure safe truck, vendor/employee and emergency vehicle access. The Project would not
impair or otherwise adversely affect emergency vehicle circulation or access to the site or other
properties in the area. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-17.
3.16. Utilities and Service Systems
Significance Threshold: Would the project comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and regulations related
to solid waste?
Basis of Conclusion: Construction and operation associated with implementation the Project
would be conducted in compliance with applicable statues and regulations related to solid waste.
No impact would occur and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-20.
3.17. Wildfire
Significance Threshold: Would the project require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks,
emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that
may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or
ongoing impacts to the environment?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is not located within a very high fire hazard severity zone,
and is surrounded by development, with no wildland areas in the immediate vicinity. As such, no
impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-21.
Page 59Page239
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 17
Significance Threshold: Would the project expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or
drainage changes?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site and surrounding area is relatively flat and heavily
urbanized. Additionally, the Project site is not located within a 100-year floodplain. If the area
were to burn, fires are anticipated to be isolated and not expected to result in substantive risk
from landslide or mudflows caused by run-off, post-fire slope instability or drainage changes. No
impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-22.
SECTION 4. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
FOUND TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT (NO
MITIGATION REQUIRED)
The City agrees with the characterization in the Final EIR with respect to impacts identified as
"less than significant impact" and finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, as
discussed below, the following impacts associated with the Project are not significant or are less
than significant, and do not require mitigation, as described in the Final EIR. Under CEQA, no
mitigation measures are required for impacts that are less than significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, § 21002; CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15126.4, subd. (a)(3); 15091.) Note that impacts are
presented below in summary form. For a full description of impacts, see the appropriate text in
the EIR, which the Council hereby incorporates by reference into these Findings.
4.1. Aesthetics
Significance Threshold: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site does not contain scenic resource and would be
consistent with the overall context of the surrounding area. The Project would not have a
substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista, resulting in a less than significant impact.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-2 through 5-4.
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is within an urbanized area of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga. As such, the analysis for this threshold is based on the review of the potential for
Page 60Page240
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 18
the Project to conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. The
Project would not conflict with the applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic
quality, including Rancho Cucamonga Development Code standards and General Plan polices.
A less than significant impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-4 through 5-5.
Significance Threshold: Would the project create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in
the area?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is located in an urban area, which includes existing
sources of light and glare. The Project would add new lighting to the site. All outdoor street
lighting and on-site security lighting and landscape lighting would be designed to City of Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code standards. Impacts would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-5.
4.2. Air Quality
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project area is within the South Coast Air Basin and therefore is
under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The
SCAQMD has two criteria used to determine consistency with the Air Quality Management Plan
(AQMP). The Project would comply with both of the AQMP’s criteria. Therefore, the Project would
be compliant with the applicable AQMP. Impacts would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-19 through 4-20.
Significance Threshold Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not expose sensitive receptors (e.g., residents,
workers or school children) to substantial pollutant concentrations, including localized criteria
pollutant emissions during construction and operation, mobile source and construction-related
diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions, or carbon monoxide (CO) “Hot Spots”. Impacts would
be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-24 through 4-26.
Significance Threshold: Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people?
Page 61Page241
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 19
Basis of Conclusion: The proposed Project would generate odors from construction (i.e., diesel
exhaust, asphalt). Construction emissions would not exceed SCAQMD impact thresholds and
would be short-term in duration. Thus, short-term odors are not expected to be significant.
Operation of the warehouse facility would not cause odors. Impacts would be less than
significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-26.
4.3. Energy
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during
project construction or operation?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would adhere to the state-mandated provisions of California
Energy Code Title 24. The Project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy, or wasteful use of energy resources, during Project construction or
operation. Impacts would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-8 through 5-9.
4.4. Geology and Soils
Significance Threshold: Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving 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 or
strong seismic ground shaking?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is not in a fault hazard area; nor is the Project site within
a mapped Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The Project site is within a seismically active
region. As such, the Project’s proposed structures may be subject to moderate to large seismic
events, resulting in strong seismic ground shaking. The Project would be required to comply with
the California Building Code (CBC) and would be required to incorporate the recommendations
from the Geotechnical Investigation, which would ensure that people and/or structures would not
be exposed to potential substantial adverse effects from strong seismic ground shaking. Impacts
would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-62.
Page 62Page242
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 20
Significance Threshold: Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death from seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
Basis of Conclusion: Groundwater was not encountered during site borings and groundwater
within the Project area is likely of sufficient depth that liquefaction during a seismic event is
unlikely. The potential for encountering groundwater and related impacts associated with
liquefaction at the Project site is considered low. Impacts would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-62 through 4-63.
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss
of topsoil?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is flat, limiting erosion potential. Construction activities
would be conducted in compliance regulations pertaining to protection of water quality. With
adherence to existing regulations and requirements, there would be a less than significant impact
related to erosion during construction and operation.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-63 through 4-64.
Significance Threshold: Would the project 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?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would be required to incorporate the recommendations from
the Geotechnical Investigation, which would ensure that these hazards would be reduced with
proper site preparation. No groundwater was encountered during site borings and groundwater
within the Project area is likely of sufficient depth that liquefaction during a seismic event is
unlikely. Further, the site has dense subsurface soil conditions. Thus, potential impacts related
to land subsidence or lateral spreading would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-64.
Significance Threshold: Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Basis of Conclusion: The majority of the City is underlain by bedrock consisting of surficial
sedimentary or metamorphic rocks that are unlikely to contain significant vertebrate fossils;
however, there may be sedimentary deposits at a greater depth. The Geotechnical Report states
that soils below the site to a depth of 16 feet bgs are comprised of native soil containing alluvial
sand, fine to course-grained, silty, gravelly, dry to damp material. The Project would not excavate
more than approximately four feet below bgs for the building footings, utilities and related
Page 63Page243
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 21
improvements. The surficial sediment at depths that would be encountered by project
excavations are unlikely to contain vertebrate fossils. No paleontological resources were
discovered during remediation activities nor are these resources known to occur in the area,
particularly at depths that would be excavated by the Project. Excavation depths would be limited
to that needed to grade the site and construct building foundations and subsurface utilities and
improvements. Impacts would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-9 through 5-10.
4.5. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Significance Threshold: Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment?
Basis of Conclusion: Construction and operation of the Project, would not exceed the South
Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)/City screening threshold for greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions and would not generate a net increase in GHG emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may significantly impact the environment. GHG emissions impacts would be less
than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-75.
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions
of greenhouse gases?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions, including Senate Bill (SB) 32 and the
California Air Resources Board (CARB) 2017 Scoping Plan, Connect SoCal, and the City of
Rancho Cucamonga Sustainable Community Action Plan. This impact is less than significant
and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-76 through 4-81.
4.6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Significance Threshold: Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
Basis of Conclusion: Construction and operation of the Project would involve handling of
hazardous materials in limited quantities and typical to developed environments. Based on the
site investigation and remediation work performed to date, encountering hazardous materials
during construction is not anticipated. Through compliance with existing applicable regulations,
Page 64Page244
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 22
the Project would not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the
routine transport, use, storage, emission, or disposal of hazardous materials. Impacts would be
less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-87 through 4-88.
Significance Threshold: Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the likely release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would comply with existing applicable regulations and would
not increase the potential for accident conditions which could result in the release of hazardous
materials into the environment. The accidental release of hazardous materials on-site is unlikely
because of the regulations in place to avoid such an event. Impacts are anticipated to be less
than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-88 through 4-89.
4.7. Hydrology and Water Quality
Significance Threshold: Would the project violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground water quality?
Basis of Conclusion: Proposed drainage patterns would maintain the existing drainage pattern
and the Project would be designed to convey surface flows into an underground system where it
would be treated prior to percolation into subsurface soils. The Project would not substantially
degrade water quality or otherwise violate discharge standards. Impacts would be less than
significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-98.
Significance Threshold: Would the project substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is currently pervious; and post-construction, the majority
of the site would be impervious. However, all stormwater would be retained in an underground
storage infiltration system and allowed to percolate into the soil. The Project would change how
the site percolates water; however, overall recharge volumes within the basin would not change
as a result of the Project. Thus, the Project would not directly interfere with groundwater recharge
or contribute to depletion groundwater. A less than significant impact would occur.
Page 65Page245
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 23
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-99.
Significance Threshold: Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?;
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff
in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?;
iii) Create or contribute runoff which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems
or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
or;
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
Basis of Conclusion: With implementation of the stormwater system as designed, no off-site
erosion or siltation would occur. The Project site is not located within a 100-year mapped flood
zone nor is it located in proximity to drainage features that would cause or contribute to flooding
conditions. Thus, the Project would not expose people or structures to flood hazard from severe
storm events. The Project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition
of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off- site, substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would
result in flooding on- or off-site, 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, or impede or redirect flood flows. Impacts would be less than significant and no
mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-99 through 4-101.
4.8. Noise
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in generation of a substantial
temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established
in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not result in the generation of a substantial temporary
or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards
Page 66Page246
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 24
established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies. Noise levels would be below the thresholds of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code
for construction and operations. This impact is less than significant and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-109 through 4-113.
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not result in the generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels during construction or operation. This impact is less than
significant and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-113 through 4-114.
4.9. Public Services
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities or a 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: Fire
Protection, Police Protection, Schools and Parks:
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not involve new residential uses or an increase in the
City’s population, and there is an existing demand for public services at the Project site
associated with the existing development on-site. The Project would be developed in adherence
to existing regulations relative to fire protection and required development impact fees would be
paid. The Project would not increase the population of Rancho Cucamonga or otherwise affect
demand for park facilities. The Project would not remove park or recreational facilities that would
require replacement elsewhere. The Project would not require the construction of new or
alteration of existing public service facilities to maintain an adequate level of service to the Project
area, and no physical environmental impacts would result. Impacts to public services would be
less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-14 through 5-16.
4.10. Transportation/Traffic
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Page 67Page247
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 25
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not be required to make road improvements; however,
frontage and access improvements would be required per the City of Rancho Cucamonga. This
would improve overall pedestrian circulation and safety within the area. The Project would not
conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. This impact is less than significant and no
mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-122 through 4-123.
Significance Threshold Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project’s VMT impact would be considered less than significant based
on the City’s TPA Screening VMT Area screening threshold. The Project site is located within a
TPA is considered less than significant due to meeting each of the criteria for projects within
TPAs. Thus, the Project would not conflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.3, subdivision (b). This impact is less than significant and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-123 through 4-125.
4.11. Utilities and Service Systems
Significance Threshold: Would the project require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment
or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation
of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would create additional demand on existing facilities;
however, demand would be met with existing infrastructure. No additional water or wastewater
treatment facilities would be required to meet Project demand. No additional electrical or
telecommunication systems would need to be constructed to meet Project demand. All waste
material would be collected and disposed of in nearby landfills within permitted capacity. No
additional facilities would need to be constructed to accommodate Project demand. A less than
significant impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-17 through 5-19.
Significance Threshold: Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Basis of Conclusion: Development allowed by the Project would require water supplies from
the CVWD. Project demand would be within the demand projections provided in the CVWD
Urban Water Management Plan. Impacts would be less than significant.
Page 68Page248
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 26
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-19.
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider that 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?
Basis of Conclusion: The Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA) wastewater treatment facilities
have sufficient capacity to serve the Project and existing commitments. This impact would be
less than significant and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-19 through 5-20.
Significance Threshold: Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project’s construction and operational refuse would be disposed of
at the Mid Valley Landfill. Construction and operational activities would comply with applicable
regulations addressing solid waste management. The Project would not generate solid waste in
excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise
impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. This impact would be less than significant
and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-20.
Significance Threshold: Would the project comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and regulations related
to solid waste?
Basis of Conclusion: Construction and operation associated with implementation the Project
would be conducted in compliance with applicable statues and regulations related to solid waste.
No impact would occur and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-20 through 5-21.
4.12. Wildfire
Significance Threshold: Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not alter emergency access routes. Emergency vehicle
access to the site would be provided via Milliken Avenue or Jersey Boulevard. The Project would
Page 69Page249
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 27
not adversely impact traffic operations on Milliken Avenue or Jersey Boulevard and would not
impact use of either street as an evacuation route. A less than significant impact would occur
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-21.
Significance Threshold: Would the project, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project is surrounded by warehouse and industrial uses. prevailing
wind is from the west and the Project is located in a flat area. Vegetation in the area is sparse
and there are no areas of native habitat that could burn in the event a wildfire occurs. The Project
site is not expected to be exposed to high-risks resulting from surrounding slopes or prevailing
winds. Impacts would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-21.
SECTION 5. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
FOUND TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH
MITIGATION INCORPORATED
Pursuant to PRC § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), based on substantial
evidence, the City finds that for each of the impacts discussed below the Project’s potentially
significant impacts have been avoided, offset or reduced to less than significant levels in
consideration of existing regulatory plans and programs (described in the DEIR Section 4 for
each applicable impact topic), and EIR mitigation measures (as listed in Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program [MMRP], and summarized below).
5.1. Air Quality
Impact 4.1-2: Would the project violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutants for which the project region
is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?
Basis for Conclusion: The air quality plan applicable to the Project is the SCAQMD‘s Final 2016
Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The Project’s net operational emissions would not exceed
the applicable South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regional or local
significance thresholds or (LST), and the Project’s construction and operational characteristics
Page 70Page250
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 28
would not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP. Additionally, during operation, the Project would
not result in a cumulatively-considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project
region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard, and
impacts would therefore be less than significant.
In terms of project-related construction emissions, the DEIR assumed that graded soils would be
balanced on the Project site and that no soil import or export would be required. The Project would
be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 403, which identifies measures to reduce fugitive dust
and is required to be implemented at all construction sites located within the South Coast Air
Basin. Therefore, the following conditions, which are conditioned as part of the Project to reduce
fugitive dust in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, were included in air quality model
(CalEEMod) for site preparation and grading phases of construction.
1. Minimization of Disturbance. Construction contractors should minimize the area
disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations to prevent
excessive amounts of dust.
2. Soil Treatment. Construction contractors should treat all graded and excavated material,
exposed soil areas, and active portions of the construction site, including unpaved on-site
roadways to minimize fugitive dust. Treatment shall include, but not necessarily be limited
to, periodic watering, application of environmentally safe soil stabilization materials, and/or
roll compaction as appropriate. Watering shall be done as often as necessary, and at least
twice daily, preferably in the late morning and after work is done for the day. The analysis
provided herein assumes watering would occur by contractor two times daily as required
per SCAQMD Rule 403.
3. Soil Stabilization. Construction contractors should monitor all graded and/or excavated
inactive areas of the construction site at least weekly for dust stabilization. Soil stabilization
methods, such as water and roll compaction, and environmentally safe dust control
materials, shall be applied to portions of the construction site that are inactive for over four
days. If no further grading or excavation operations are planned for the area, the area shall
be seeded and watered until landscape growth is evident, or periodically treated with
environmentally safe dust suppressants, to prevent excessive fugitive dust.
4. No Grading During High Winds. Construction contractors should stop all clearing,
grading, earth moving, and excavation operations during periods of high winds (20 miles
per hour or greater, as measured continuously over a one-hour period).
5. Street Sweeping. Construction contractors should sweep all on-site driveways and
adjacent streets and roads at least once per day, preferably at the end of the day, if visible
soil material is carried over to adjacent streets and roads.
Page 71Page251
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 29
Therefore, the Project’s regional air quality impacts (including impacts related to criteria pollutants
and violations of air quality standards) would be less than significant. Nonetheless, prior to
mitigation the Project’s construction-related emissions could exceed the SCAQMD regional
thresholds for ROG. Thus, Project-related construction activities have the potential to result in an
increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to
new violations or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions
reductions specified in the 2016 AQMP, resulting in a potentially significant impact. With the
implementation of MM AQ-1, which includes additional construction-related mitigation
requirements to ensure that the architectural coating phase and the building phase would overlap
for approximately 44 total workdays to avoid exceeding the daily ROG standard.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.1, Air Quality of the DEIR,
which is incorporated herein by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are feasible and are
made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will reduce potentially
significant impacts to less than significant.
MM AQ-1 Condition Project to overlap architectural coating phase with the building phase
by approximately 44 total workdays to avoid exceeding the daily ROG standard. Prior to issuance
of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit a detailed construction schedule to the City of
Rancho Cucamonga which demonstrates that the architectural coating phase will overlap with
the building phase by a minimum of 44 days.
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Findings 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section
15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to
below a level of significance.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-20 through 4-26.
5.2. Biological Resources
Impact 4.2-1: Would the project 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 Wildlife or the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site consists of undeveloped land that has been impacted by
decades of anthropogenic disturbances. No special-status species were observed on-site during
the habitat assessment. The Project site and surrounding areas provide limited foraging and
nesting habitat for year-round and seasonal birds and migrating songbirds. While it is unknown
Page 72Page252
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 30
whether nesting would occur or what species would nest on-site, if construction activities occur
between February 1 through August 31st, nesting and migratory bird species covered by the
MBTA could be significantly affected by construction activities. Project construction would impact
nesting and migratory bird species covered by the MBTA. Implementation of MM BIO-1, which
requires pre-construction surveys, would reduce impacts to nesting and migratory birds to less
than significant.
Mitigation Measure: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.2, Biological Resources of
the DEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are
feasible and are made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will
reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
MM BIO-1 Pursuant to the MBTA and Fish and Game Code, removal of any trees, shrubs,
or any other potential nesting habitat should be conducted outside the avian nesting season. The
nesting season extends from February 1 through August 31 but can vary slightly from year to
year based upon seasonal weather conditions. If ground disturbance and vegetation removal
cannot occur outside of the nesting season, a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds,
shall be conducted by a qualified biologist at the direction of the Project Applicant and City of
Rancho Cucamonga within three (3) days of the start of any ground disturbing activities to ensure
that no nesting birds will be disturbed during construction.
If an active avian nest is discovered during the pre-construction clearance survey, construction
activities can commence thereafter provided activities are able to maintain a 300-foot buffer
around the active nest. For raptors and special-status species, this buffer will be expanded to
500 feet. A biological monitor shall be present during construction activities within the buffer area.
to delineate the boundaries of the buffers and to monitor the active nest to ensure that nesting
behavior is not adversely affected by the construction activity.
If the biologist determines that bird breeding activity is being disrupted, the Project Applicant shall
stop work, notify the City and coordinate with the USFWS and CDFW to agree upon an
avoidance/minimization approach. Upon agreement of the avoidance/ minimization approach,
work may resume subject to the revisions and continued monitoring.
If burrowing owls are detected on-site during the clearance survey, in conformance with the
California Staff Report’s protocols, no ground-disturbing activities will be permitted within 656
feet of an occupied burrow during the breeding season (February 1 to August 31), unless
otherwise authorized by CDFW.
Once the qualified biologist has determined the young have fledged and left the nest of any birds
within the buffer area(s), or the nest otherwise becomes inactive under natural conditions, normal
construction activities can occur.
Reporting. If no active nests are found during the pre-construction clearance survey, the Project
Applicant shall submit to the City of Rancho Cucamonga a brief letter report prepared by the
Page 73Page253
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 31
biologist that documents the negative survey results. The letter report shall also indicate that no
impacts to active avian nests will occur.
If active nests were found, the Project Applicant shall submit a final bird survey monitoring report
prepared by the Project biologist to the City, the USFWS and CDFW. The report shall include
documentation of all bird surveys, monitoring activities, coordination efforts with the wildlife
agencies, as-built construction drawings with an overlay of any active nests in the survey areas,
photographs of habitat areas during pre-construction and postconstruction conditions, and other
relevant summary information documenting that authorized impacts were not exceeded and that
general compliance was achieved for the avoidance/minimization provisions and the biological
monitoring program required by the wildlife agencies.
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Findings 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section
15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to
below a level of significance.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-37 through 4-39.
5.3. Cultural Resources
Impact 4.3-2: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to
§15064.5?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project has the potential to encounter subsurface archaeological
resources during construction resulting in a potentially significant impact to previously
unrecorded subsurface cultural resources prior to mitigation. Implementation of MM CUL-1 and
MM CUL-2, which identify actions to be taken during construction to protect unknown resources,
would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. MM CUL-1 requires a qualified
archaeologist be retained to evaluate any cultural resources that are discovered during project
activities. In the event that archaeological resources are discovered and avoidance cannot be
ensured, MM CUL-2 requires the qualified archaeologist to develop a Monitoring and Treatment
Plan.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.3, Cultural Resources of
the DEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are
feasible and are made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will
reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
MM CUL-1 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
Page 74Page254
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 32
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 Gabriel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) Cultural Resources
Department shall be contacted, as detailed within TCR-1, regarding any pre-contact and/or
historic-era 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. Prior to the release of the Grading Bond, a Monitoring Report and/or Evaluation
Report, which describes the results, analysis and conclusions of the cultural resource mitigation
monitoring efforts shall be submitted by the qualified archaeologist, along with the Native
American Monitor’s notes and comments, to the City for review and approval.
MM CUL-2 If significant pre-contact and/or historic-era 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.
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Findings 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section
15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to
below a level of significance.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-53 through 4-55.
Impact 4.3-3: Would the project disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Basis of Conclusion: No human remains or cemeteries were identified as a result of the SCCIC
search and pedestrian field survey. The potential for encountering human remains at the Project
site is low, however, there is a potential to encounter subsurface remains during construction.
resulting in a potentially significant impact prior to mitigation. MM CUL-3 identifies actions that
should be taken if human remains are encountered. This measure would reduce impacts to a
less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.3, Cultural Resources of
the DEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are
feasible and are made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will
reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
MM CUL-3 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
Page 75Page255
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 33
§7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the Project. If the human remains are
determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission,
which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant. The Most Likely Descendant shall
complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific
removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native
American burials.
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Findings 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section
15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to
below a level of significance.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-53 through 4-55.
5.4. Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact 4.10-1: 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 cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and
that is:
(i) 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)
(ii) 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 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead
agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a
California Native American Tribe?
Basis of Conclusion: The combined South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), Native
American Heritage Commission (NAHC) sacred land files (SLF) search, and pedestrian
archaeological field survey did not identify any existing historic resources within the proposed
Project area. Further, the Project site has been heavily disturbed by past soil remediation
Page 76Page256
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 34
activities. For this reason, the Project is not anticipated to cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a known historic resource as defined in PRC 5020.1 (k). However, if
construction ground disturbance depths range within native soils (at least 1 foot or more bgs),
there would be a potential to impact previously unrecorded subsurface tribal cultural resources.
Implementation of MM TCR-1 through TCR-6, agreed upon during the City’s consultation with
the California Native American tribes, would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
TCR-1 through TCR-6 require monitoring of ground-disturbing activities, outline the parameters
for the monitoring activities, and identify actions that should be taken if tribal cultural resources
or Native American human remains are encountered. These measures further ensure the proper
identification and subsequent treatment of any tribal cultural resources and/or Native American
human remains that may be encountered during ground-disturbing activities associated with the
development of the Project. These measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant
impact.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.10, Tribal Cultural
Resources of the DEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following Mitigation
Measures are feasible and are made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation
measures will reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
MM TCR-1 The San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) Cultural Resources
Department shall be contacted, as detailed in Mitigation Measure CUL-1, of any pre-contact
and/or historic-era 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 resource Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be created by the
qualified archaeologist in coordination with SMBMI and submitted to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga for review and approval. The qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the Project
Applicant to implement all mitigation measures related to archaeological and historical resources.
All subsequent finds shall be subject to the Monitoring and Treatment Plan. This Plan shall
include tribal contact information, protocol to following should cultural resources be discovered,
curation requirements and allow for a monitor to be present that represents SMBMI for the
remainder of the Project’s ground disturbing activities, should SMBMI elect to place a monitor
on-site.
MM TCR-2 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 the City of Rancho Cucamonga for dissemination to SMBMI. The City of Rancho
Cucamonga and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with SMBMI until all ground disturbing
activities have been completed.
MM TCR-3 The Project Applicant shall be required to retain, prior to the commencement of
construction, and compensate for the services of a Tribal monitor/consultant who is both
approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation Tribal Government and is listed
Page 77Page257
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 35
under the NAHC’s Tribal Contact list for the area of the Project location. This list is provided by
the NAHC. The monitor/consultant will only be present on-site during the construction phases
that involve ground disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined by the
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that may include, but are not limited
to, pavement removal, pot-holing or auguring, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading,
excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the Project area. The Tribal Monitor/consultant will
complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including
construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site monitoring
shall end when the Project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the
Tribal Representatives and monitor/consultant have indicated that the site has a low potential for
impacting Tribal Cultural Resources.
MM TCR-4 Upon discovery of any archaeological resources, cease construction activities in
the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can be assessed by the qualified archaeologist
and/or Native American monitor. All archaeological resources unearthed by project construction
activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and tribal monitor/consultant approved
by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation. If the resources are Native American in
origin, the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation shall coordinate with the landowner
regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, the Tribe will request reburial or
preservation for educational purposes. Work may continue on other parts of the Project while
evaluation and, if necessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 [f]). If a
resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a “historical resource” or
“unique archaeological resource”, time allotment and funding sufficient to allow for
implementation of avoidance measures, or appropriate mitigation, must be available. The
treatment plan established for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.5(f) for historical resources.
MM TCR-5 Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment. If
preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological
data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing
and analysis. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be
curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the
Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution
agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be
offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.
MM TCR-6 Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an
inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary
objects, called associated grave goods in PRC 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this
statute. Health and Safety Code 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material
shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and excavation halted until the coroner has
determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those
of a Native American or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or
Page 78Page258
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 36
she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission
(NAHC) and PRC 5097.98 shall be followed.
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Findings 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section
15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to
below a level of significance.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-130 through 4-133.
SECTION 6. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES TO THE
PROPOSED PROJECT
CEQA requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the
location of the project, that could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project, and to evaluate
the comparative merits of the alternatives (14 CCR 15126.6[a]). The CEQA Guidelines direct that
the selection of alternatives be governed by “a rule of reason” (14 CCR 15126.6[a], [f]). As
defined by the CEQA Guidelines, “The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by a
‘rule of reason’ that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a
reasoned choice. The alternatives shall be limited to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen
any of the significant effects of the project. Of those alternatives, the EIR needs to examine in
detail only the ones that the Lead Agency determines could feasibly attain most of the basic
objectives of the project” (14 CCR 15126.6[f]). The Project objectives are set forth in DEIR
Section 6.2.
6.1. Alternatives Considered and Rejected
The CEQA Guidelines provide that this EIR should “identify any alternatives that were considered
by the Lead Agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process and briefly explain
the reasons underlying the Lead Agency’s determination” (14 CCR 15126.6[c]). The following is
a discussion of the proposed project alternatives developed during the scoping and planning
process and the reasons they were not selected for detailed analysis in this EIR.
With respect to the feasibility of potential alternatives to the proposed project, CEQA Guidelines
§ 15126.6(t)(l) states, “Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the
feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure,
general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries . . . and
whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the
alternative site.”
In determining an appropriate range of project alternatives to be evaluated in this EIR, a number
of possible alternatives were initially considered and then rejected. Project alternatives were
Page 79Page259
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 37
rejected because they could not accomplish the basic objectives of the proposed Project; they
would not have resulted in a reduction of significant adverse environmental impacts; or they were
considered infeasible to construct or operate.
The following alternative has been rejected from further consideration:
6.2. Alternative Sites
In the case of the Project, an alternative site is not considered applicable or feasible, as the
Project Applicant does not own or control other undeveloped property of similar size and zoning
within the City or in the immediate area. Further, construction of a project different in scope from
the proposed Project would not meet the objectives that focus on development of warehousing
facilities within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. For the above reasons, the Alternative Site
Alternative was found to be infeasible and therefore was rejected from further consideration.
6.3. Alternatives Selected for Further Analysis
The following alternatives were addressed in the DEIR:
• The No Project Alternative
• The Reduced Footprint Alternative
No Project Alternative
Consistent with CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6(e)(3)(b)), the No Project Alternative is
defined as the “circumstance under which the project does not proceed.” Section 15126.6(e) of
the CEQA Guidelines requires analysis of a No Project alternative that (1) discusses existing site
conditions at the time the NOP is prepared or the EIR is commenced, and (2) analyzes what can
reasonably be expected to occur in the foreseeable future based on current plans if the proposed
Project were not approved. Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Project would not be
implemented and the site would remain undeveloped.
Findings Regarding Environmental Impacts
The Project would not result in any significant and unavoidable impacts; therefore, the No Project
Alternative would not avoid or substantially lessen a significant and unavoidable impact. However,
the No Project Alternative would avoid the Project’s less than significant impacts.
Findings Regarding Project Objectives
The No Project Alternative would not meet any of the Project objectives, would not realize any of
the Project’s benefits resulting from the creation of employment opportunities in the City of
Rancho Cucamonga to reduce the need for members of the local workforce to commute outside
the area for employment and improve the jobs to housing balance.
Page 80Page260
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 38
Overall Finding: The City adopts Finding 3.
The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make
this alternative infeasible. Although the No Project Alternative would avoid the Project’s less than
significant environmental impacts, this alternative would not meet any of the Project’s objectives.
Supporting Evidence: Please see DEIR Pages 6-4 through 6-5.
Reduced Footprint Alternative
Under this alternative, the proposed Project would be reduced by approximately 2/3 of the overall
square footage of each component. The warehouse would be reduced to 93,389 square feet in
four separate units, 5,364 square feet of mezzanine storage, 5,364 square feet of office space
(i.e., divided into four separate spaces, one for each storage unit) and a 203-square foot electrical
room. The total building area would be 104,320 square feet. The highest point of the building
would be 42 feet above ground level. These would be the architectural parapets on the building
frontage. A total of 73 parking spaces would be provided. The warehouse building would be
oriented east/west with vehicle access to office space fronting the building from Jersey
Boulevard. Truck access to the loading docks located at the rear of the building would be
provided from Milliken Avenue. The truck access driveway would be gated with security cameras
and monitored to ensure no unauthorized entrance to the loading area. The Reduced Footprint
Alternative would provide four warehouse storage units, each with three truck loading docks (i.e.,
12 total docks). Water/sewer and other utilities (i.e., electrical, communication) would be provided
via existing infrastructure located on-site or within the adjacent Milliken Avenue and Jersey
Boulevard corridors. All other features of the Reduced Footprint Alternative would be similar to
the proposed Project.
Findings Regarding Environmental Impacts
The Project would not result in any significant and unavoidable impacts; therefore, the Reduced
Footprint Alternative would not avoid or substantially lessen a significant and unavoidable impact.
Project-level mitigation measures are required to reduce potentially significant impacts to levels
considered less than significant for the following environmental resources: biological resources
(due to potential presence of Cooper’s Hawk, California horned lark, burrowing owl and other
nesting bird species), cultural resources (due to the potential to encounter previously unrecorded
subsurface cultural resources), and tribal cultural resources (due to the potential to encounter
previously unknown tribal cultural resources). These potentially significant impacts are
associated with construction activities, not operation of the Project.
Both the Project and the Reduced Footprint Alternative would be required to comply with
applicable regulations and would also implement the same mitigation measures required for the
Project. The Reduced Project Alternative would disturb the same area as the proposed Project;
however, the overall building footprint would be smaller. This would reduce the number of
vehicles and trucks accessing the Project site daily. However, while the degree of impact would
be incrementally less than the proposed Project for some issue areas, the impact determination
Page 81Page261
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 39
under the proposed Project would be similar to the proposed Project for all topical areas
addressed in the Draft EIR.
Findings Regarding Project Objectives
The discussion below addresses the ability of the Reduced Footprint Alternative to attain the
Project objectives.
4. Ensure that development of the Project site is accomplished consistent with
applicable goals and policies of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as set forth in
the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The Reduced Footprint Alternative would
disturb the same area as the proposed Project; however the overall building footprint
would be smaller and would not develop the site at density envisioned in the Rancho
Cucamonga General Plan. Therefore, while the Reduced Footprint Alternative meets
the intent of this Project objective, it does not meet it to the same extent as the Project.
5. Develop a vacant and underutilized Project site. The Reduced Footprint Alternative
would develop industrial/warehouse use on the Project site; however it would not
maximize development of the underutilized Project site. While the Reduced Footprint
Alternative meets the intent of this Project objective, it does not meet it to the same
extent as the Project.
6. Contribute to the warehousing resources in the City of Rancho Cucamonga by
constructing an operating a facility this designed consistent with contemporary
industry standards for operational design criteria, can accommodate a wide
variety of users and are economically competitive with similar industrial
buildings in the local area and region. The Reduced Footprint Alternative would
develop industrial/warehouse use on the Project site, thereby meeting the intent of the
Project objective. However, because a smaller warehouse building would be
constructed, compared to the proposed Project, the Reduced Footprint Alternative
does not meet this objective to the same extent as the Project.
7. Create employment opportunities in the City of Rancho Cucamonga to reduce
the need for members of the local workforce to commute outside the area for
employment and improve the jobs to housing balance. The Reduced Footprint
Alternative would generate more employment opportunities than what would be
generated by a vacant lot; however, it would not achieve this objective to the same
extent as the Project.
8. To develop a project with an architectural design and operational characteristics
that complement other existing buildings in the immediate vicinity and minimize
conflicts with other nearby land uses. The Reduced Footprint Alternative would not
conflict with existing architecture or the operations of nearby uses and would achieve
this objective.
9. To maximize industrial warehouse buildings in close proximity to an already-
established industrial area, designated truck routes, and the State highway
Page 82Page262
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 40
system in order to avoid or shorten truck-trip lengths on other roadways, and
avoid locating industrial warehouse buildings in close proximity to residential
uses. The Reduced Footprint Alternative would develop a smaller warehouse facility,
compared to the proposed Project and would not maximize the amount of available
industrial warehouse space, and therefore, would not meet this Project objective.
10. To develop a property that has access to available infrastructure, including
roads and utilities to be used as part of the Southern California supply chain
and goods movement network. The Reduced Footprint Alternative would develop
industrial/warehouse use on the Project site that would utilize available infrastructure
used as part of the Southern California supply chain and goods movement network.
The Reduced Footprint Alternative would meet the intent of this objective, but not to
the same extent as the Project relative to supporting goods movement in Southern
California.
Overall Finding: The City adopts Finding 3.
The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make
this alternative infeasible. Although the No Project Alternative would avoid the Project’s less than
significant environmental impacts, this alternative would not meet any of the Project’s objectives.
Supporting Evidence: Please see DEIR Pages 6-6 through 6-8.
Environmentally Superior Alternative
Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an environmentally superior
alternative be designated and states that if the environmentally superior Alternative is the No
Project Alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the
other alternatives. Based on the summary of information presented in Section 6 of the DEIR, the
environmentally superior Alternative is The No Project Alternative. Because the No Project
Alternative would leave the Project site essentially unchanged and would not have the
operational effects that would be associated with any of the alternatives, this Alternative has
fewer environmental impacts than the proposed Project or any of the other alternatives.
Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines states that if the “No Project” alternative is
found to be environmentally superior, “the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior
alternative among the other alternatives.” Aside from the No Project Alternative, Alternative 2:
Reduced Footprint Alternative would have the least environmental impacts because it would
develop less of the Project area, result in a reduction of vehicle trips and would incrementally
reduce impacts to resource areas.
CEQA requires the identification of an environmentally superior alternative. As discussed above,
the No Project/No Action Alternative, in which the proposed Project is not implemented, would
result in no change from current conditions. However, Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the CEQA
Guidelines states that, if the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative,
Page 83Page263
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 41
then the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other
alternatives.
Additional CEQA Considerations
Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts (DEIR Section 5.2)
The potentially adverse effects of the proposed Project are discussed in Sections 4.1 through
4.10 of DEIR. Mitigation measures have been recommended that would avoid, reduce or
minimize impacts. All the potential impacts associated with the proposed Project would be either
less than significant or mitigated to less than significant. The proposed Project would not result
in any significant unavoidable impacts.
Irreversible Environmental Changes (DEIR Section 5.3)
Both construction and operation of the proposed Project would lead to the consumption of limited,
slowly renewable, and non-renewable resources, committing such resources to uses that future
generations would be unable to reverse. The new development would require the commitment
of resources that include: (1) building materials; (2) fuel and operational materials/resources; and
(3) the transportation of goods and people to and from the new warehouse.
Title 24 of the California Administrative Code regulates the amount of energy consumed by new
development. Nevertheless, the consumption of such resources would represent a long-term
commitment of those resources. The commitment of resources required for the construction and
operation of the proposed Project would limit the availability of such resources for future
generations or for other uses during the life of the proposed Project. However, continued use of
such resources is consistent with the planned changes on the proposed Project site and within
the general vicinity.
Growth Inducing Impacts (DEIR Section 5.4)
The proposed Project would not directly induce growth as it does not involve residential
development. The proposed Project site has been designated for industrial/warehousing uses as
identified in the City’s adopted General Plan. In addition, the proposed Project would not remove
obstacles to regional growth and related development.
The Project will generate approximately 111 new jobs. Of the total, approximately 86 percent, or
95 jobs, will be filled by employees residing outside the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The
remaining 16 jobs will be filled by existing city residents. The addition of 111 new jobs would
represent a 0.12 percent increase in total employment. The proposed Project may result in
negligible population growth; however, the area is primarily built out. Any new residents would
be expected to occupy existing housing units or those in the planning stage. Any new residents
would not represent unplanned population growth in the community or result in economic growth
that exceeds levels anticipated in plans adopted by the City. Therefore, no significant impacts
related to growth inducement would occur.
Page 84Page264
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 42
Although the proposed Project site is currently undeveloped, the surrounding area is fully
developed with urban land uses (i.e., warehousing and light industrial). The Project would include
connections to existing utilities and installation of on-site stormwater management
improvements. Utilities and streets would not need to be extended to the Project site. The
addition of 111 new jobs, would not induce growth associated with the construction of new house
or commercial infrastructure to support the jobs. No significant impacts related to direct growth
inducement would occur.
SECTION 7. GENERAL CEQA FINDINGS
The City hereby finds as follows:
1. The foregoing statements are true and correct;
2. The City is the “Lead Agency” for the Project evaluated in the CEQA Documents and
independently reviewed and analyzed in the DEIR and FEIR for the Project;
3. The Notice of Preparation of the DEIR was circulated for public review. It requested
that responsible agencies respond as to the scope and content of the environmental
information germane to that agency’s specific responsibilities;
4. The public review period for the DEIR was for 30 days between July 2,2021 and
August 3, 2021. The DEIR and appendices were available for public review during that
time. A Notice of Completion and copies of the DEIR were sent to the State
Clearinghouse, and notices of availability of the DEIR were published by the City. The
DEIR was available for review on the City’s website. Physical copies of the
environmental documents are available at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Department.
5. The CEQA Documents were completed in compliance with CEQA;
6. The CEQA Documents reflect the City’s independent judgment;
7. The City evaluated comments on environmental issues received from persons who
reviewed the DEIR. In accordance with CEQA, the City prepared written responses
describing the disposition of significant environmental issues raised. The FEIR
provided adequate, good faith and reasoned responses to the comments. The City
reviewed the comments received and responses thereto and has determined that
neither the comments received nor the responses to such comments add significant
new information to the DEIR regarding adverse environmental impacts. The City has
based its actions on full appraisal of all viewpoints, including all comments received
up to the date of adoption of these Findings, concerning the environmental impacts
identified and analyzed in the FEIR.
8. The City finds that the CEQA Documents, as amended, provide objective information
to assist the decision-makers and the public at large in their consideration of the
environmental consequences of the Project. The public review period provided all
Page 85Page265
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 43
interested jurisdictions, agencies, private organizations, and individuals the
opportunity to submit all comments made during the public review period;
9. The CEQA Documents evaluated the following impacts: (1) air quality; (2) biological
resources; (3) cultural resources; (4) geology and soils; (5) greenhouse gas emissions;
(6) hazards and hazardous materials; (7) hydrology and water quality; (8) noise; (9)
transportation; and (10) tribal cultural resources. Additionally, the CEQA Documents
considered, in separate sections, any potential significant irreversible environmental
changes and growth-inducing impacts of the Project, as well as effects found not to be
significant and a reasonable range of project alternatives. All of the significant
environmental impacts of the Project were identified in the CEQA Documents;
10. The MMRP includes all of the mitigation measures identified in the CEQA Documents
and has been designed to ensure compliance during implementation of the Project.
The MMRP provides the steps necessary to ensure that the mitigation measures are
fully enforceable;
11. The MMRP designates responsibility and anticipated timing for the implementation of
mitigation; the City’s Community Development Director will serve as the MMRP
Coordinator;
12. In determining whether the Project may have a significant impact on the environment,
and in adopting these Findings pursuant to Section 21081 of CEQA, the City has
complied with CEQA Sections 21081.5 and 21082.2;
13. The impacts of the Project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time of
certification of the CEQA Documents;
14. The City made no decisions related to approval of the Project prior to the initial
recommendation of certification of the CEQA Documents. The City also did not commit
to a definite course of action with respect to the Project prior to the initial consideration
of the CEQA Documents.
15. Copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the CEQA Documents are
and have been available upon request at all times at the offices of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Department, the custodian of record for such documents or
other materials;
16. The responses to the comments on the DEIR, which are contained in the FEIR, clarify
and amplify the analysis in the DEIR;
17. Having reviewed the information contained in the CEQA Documents and in the
administrative record, the City finds that there is no new significant information
regarding adverse environmental impacts of the Project in the FEIR; and
18. Having received, reviewed and considered all information and documents in the CEQA
Documents, as well as all other information in the record of proceedings on this matter,
these Findings are hereby adopted by the City in its capacity as the CEQA Lead
Agency.
Page 86Page266
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 44
SECTION 8. FINDINGS REGARDING CIRCULATION
The City finds that the DEIR does not require recirculation under CEQA (PRC § 21092.1 and
CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5). CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5 requires recirculation of an EIR prior
to certification of the FEIR when “significant new information is added to the EIR after public
notice is given of the availability of the draft EIR for public review.” As described in CEQA
Guidelines § 15088.5:
New information added to an EIR is not “significant” unless the EIR is changed in a way that
deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse
environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including
a feasible project alternative) that the project’s proponents have declined to implement.
“Significant new information” requiring recirculation includes, for example, a disclosure showing
that:
1. A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new
mitigation measure proposed to be implemented;
2. A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless
mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance;
3. A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others
previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the
project, but the project’s proponents decline to adopt it;
4. The DEIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature
that meaningful public review and comment were precluded.
In addition, CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5(b) provides that “recirculation is not required where the
new information added to the EIR merely clarifies and amplifies or makes insignificant
modifications in an adequate EIR.” Recirculation also is not required simply because new
information is added to the EIR — indeed, new information is oftentimes added given CEQA’s
public/agency comment and response process and CEQA’s post-DEIR circulation requirement
of proposed responses to comments submitted by public agencies. In short, recirculation is
“intended to be an exception rather than the general rule.” (Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v.
Regents of University of California (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1112, 1132).
As such, the City makes the following Findings:
1. None of the public comments submitted to the City regarding the DEIR present any
significant new information that would require the DEIR to be recirculated for public
review.
2. No new or modified mitigation measures are proposed that would have the potential
to create new significant environmental impacts
Page 87Page267
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 45
3. The DEIR adequately analyzed project alternatives and there are no feasible project
alternatives or mitigation measures considerably different from others previously
analyzed that would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project.
4. The DEIR was not fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature
and did not preclude meaningful public review and comment.
In this legal context, the City finds that recirculation of the DEIR prior to certification is not
required. In addition to providing responses to comments, the FEIR includes revisions to expand
upon information presented in the DEIR; explain or enhance the evidentiary basis for the DEIR’s
findings; update information; and to make clarifications, amplifications, updates, or helpful
revisions to the DEIR. The FEIR’s revisions, clarifications and/or updates do not result in any
new significant impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact.
In sum, the FEIR demonstrates that the proposed Project would not result in any new significant
impacts or increase the severity of a significant impact, as compared to the analysis presented
in the DEIR. The changes reflected in the FEIR also do not indicate that meaningful public review
of the DEIR was precluded in the first instance. Accordingly, recirculation of the EIR is not
required as revisions to the EIR are not significant as defined in § 15088.5 of the CEQA
Guidelines.
SECTION 9. LEGAL EFFECTS OF FINDINGS
To the extent that these Findings conclude that the proposed mitigation measures outlined in
herein are feasible and have not been modified, superseded, or withdrawn, the City hereby
commits to implementing these measures. These Findings, in other words, are not merely
informational, but rather constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the
City approves the proposed Project.
The mitigation measures that are referenced herein and adopted concurrently with these
Findings will be effectuated through the process of construction and implementation of the
proposed Project.
Page 88Page268
FINAL
Jersey Industrial Complex Project
Environmental Impact Report
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCH No. 2021060608
Prepared for:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Contact: Vincent Acuna
Prepared by:
Birdseye Planning Group, LLC
P.O.Box 1956, Vista, CA 92085
Contact: Ryan Birdseye
January 2022
Page 89Page269
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 90Page270
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
SECTION 1. Authority ................................................................................................................. 1
SECTION 2. Monitoring Schedule ............................................................................................. 1
SECTION 3. Support Documentation ........................................................................................ 2
SECTION 4. Format of Mitigation Monitoring Matrix ............................................................... 2
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ................................................. 3
Page 91Page271
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 ii
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 92Page272
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
SECTION 1. Authority
This environmental Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Program) has been prepared
pursuant to §21081.6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code
§21000 et seq.), and CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. §15000 et seq.) §§15091(d) and
15097, to ensure implementation of and provide for the monitoring of mitigation measures
required of the Jersey Industrial Complex Project (Project), as set forth in the Final Environmental
Impact Report (FEIR) prepared for the Project. This report will be kept on file in the offices of the
CEQA Lead Agency, the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City).
The EIR addresses the potential environmental impacts of the Project, and, where appropriate,
recommends mitigation measures to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental
impacts. The Program detailed in the matrix table below is designed to monitor and ensure
implementation of all mitigation measures that are adopted for the Project.
The City is the Lead Agency for the Project and assumes ultimate enforcement responsibilities
for implementation of all mitigation measures listed in this Program. The City may assign
responsibility for implementation or monitoring to appropriate designees such as a construction
manager or third-party monitor. However, as the Lead Agency, the City remains responsible for
ensuring that implementation of the mitigation measures occurs in accordance with this Program.
In some cases, the City is required to secure permits or approvals from third-party agencies in
order to implement a mitigation measure. In these cases, the City is responsible for verifying that
such permits or approvals have been obtained in accordance with the conditions stipulated in the
mitigation measure. The City’s existing planning, engineering, operations, and procurement
review and inspection processes will be used as the basic foundation for the Program procedures
and will also serve to provide the documentation for the reporting program.
SECTION 2. Monitoring Schedule
Prior to construction, while detailed design plans are being prepared by City staff or its agents,
City staff will be responsible for ensuring compliance with mitigation monitoring applicable to the
Project construction, development, and design phases. Once construction has begun and is
underway, monitoring of the mitigation measures associated with construction will be included in
the responsibilities of City staff, who shall prepare or cause to be prepared periodic monitoring
reports, as appropriate. Regulatory agencies will have to harmonize CEQA mitigation with
regulatory permit conditions and monitoring/reporting as part of the regulatory permitting process
and will likely require submittal of formal monitoring reports. Once construction has been
completed, the City will monitor the Project as specified in the mitigation measures.
Page 93Page273
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 2
SECTION 3. Support Documentation
Findings and related documentation supporting the findings involving modifications to mitigation
measures shall be maintained in the Project file with the Program and shall be made available to
the public upon request.
SECTION 4. Format of Mitigation Monitoring Matrix
The mitigation monitoring matrix on the following pages identifies the environmental issue areas
for which monitoring is required, the required mitigation measures, the time frame for monitoring,
and the responsible implementing and monitoring agencies.
Page 94Page274
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 3
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
AIR QUALITY
AQ-1: Condition project to overlap architectural coating phase with the
building phase by approximately 44 total workdays to avoid exceeding the
daily ROG standard. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant
shall submit a detailed construction schedule to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga which demonstrates that the architectural coating phase will
overlap with the building phase by a minimum of 44 days.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to issuance of
building permits
Plan check
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
BIO-1: Pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and Fish and
Game Code, removal of any trees, shrubs, or any other potential nesting
habitat should be conducted outside the avian nesting season. The nesting
season extends from February 1 through August 31 but can vary slightly
from year to year based upon seasonal weather conditions. If ground
disturbance and vegetation removal cannot occur outside of the nesting
season, a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds, shall be
conducted by a qualified biologist within three (3) days of the start of any
ground disturbing activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed
during construction.
If an active avian nest is discovered during the pre-construction clearance
survey, construction activities can commence thereafter provided activities
are able to maintain a 300-foot buffer around the active nest. For raptors
and special-status species, this buffer will be expanded to 500 feet. A
biological monitor shall be present during construction activities within the
buffer area. to delineate the boundaries of the buffers and to monitor the
active nest to ensure that nesting behavior is not adversely affected by the
construction activity.
If the biologist determines that bird breeding activity is being disrupted, the
Project Applicant shall stop work, notify the City and coordinate with the
USFWS and CDFW to agree upon an avoidance/minimization approach.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to grading
permit and/or
construction permit
issuance; during
grading, excavation
and construction
activities, upon
completion of
monitoring
activities, and prior
to final engineering
inspection.
On-site inspection,
separate submittal
Page 95Page275
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 4
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
Upon agreement of the avoidance/ minimization approach, work may
resume subject to the revisions and continued monitoring.
If burrowing owls are detected on-site during the clearance survey, in
conformance with the California Staff Report’s protocols, no ground-
disturbing activities will be permitted within 656 feet of an occupied burrow
during the breeding season (February 1 to August 31), unless otherwise
authorized by CDFW.
Once the qualified biologist has determined the young have fledged and left
the nest of any birds within the buffer area(s), or the nest otherwise
becomes inactive under natural conditions, normal construction activities
can occur.
Reporting. If no active nests are found during the pre-construction
clearance survey, the Project Applicant shall submit to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga a brief letter report prepared by the biologist that documents
the negative survey results. The letter report shall also indicate that no
impacts to active avian nests will occur.
If active nests were found, the Project Applicant shall submit a final bird
survey monitoring report prepared by the project biologist to the City, the
USFWS and CDFW. The report shall include documentation of all bird
surveys, monitoring activities, coordination efforts with the wildlife agencies,
as-built construction drawings with an overlay of any active nests in the
survey areas, photographs of habitat areas during pre-construction and
post-construction conditions, and other relevant summary information
documenting that authorized impacts were not exceeded and that general
compliance was achieved for the avoidance/minimization provisions and the
biological monitoring program required by the wildlife agencies.
Page 96Page276
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 5
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
CULTURAL RESOURCES
CUL-1: 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 SMBMI Cultural Resources
Department shall be contacted, as detailed within TCR-1, regarding any
pre-contact and/or historic-era 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.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to issuance of
grading
permit/during
grading and
construction
Plan check,
separate submittal
CUL-2: If significant pre-contact and/or historic-era 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.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
During grading and
construction
On-site inspection,
separate submittal
CUL-3: 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. If the human remains are
determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the Native American
Heritage Commission, which will determine and notify a Most Likely
Descendant. The Most Likely Descendant shall complete the inspection of
the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific
removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items
associated with Native American burials.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to issuance of
grading
permit/during
grading and
construction
Plan check,
separate submittal
Page 97Page277
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 6
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
TCR-1: The SMBMI Cultural Resources Department shall be contacted, as
detailed in Mitigation Measure CUL-1, of any pre-contact and/or historic-era
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 resource
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.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to issuance of
grading
permit/during
grading and
construction
Plan check,
separate submittal
TCR-2: 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.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
During grading and
construction
Separate submittal
TCR-3: The Project Applicant shall be required to retain and compensate
for the services of a Tribal monitor/consultant who is both approved by the
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation Tribal Government and is
listed under the NAHC’s Tribal Contact list for the area of the Project
location. This list is provided by the NAHC. The monitor/consultant will only
be present on-site during the construction phases that involve ground
disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined by the
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that may
include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, pot-holing or auguring,
grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching,
within the Project area. The Tribal Monitor/consultant will complete daily
monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including
construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified.
The on-site monitoring shall end when the Project site grading and
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to issuance of
grading
permit/during
grading and
construction
On-site inspection,
other agency
permit/approval
Page 98Page278
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 7
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and
monitor/consultant have indicated that the site has a low potential for
impacting Tribal Cultural Resources.
TCR-4: Upon discovery of any archaeological resources, cease
construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can
be assessed. All archaeological resources unearthed by project
construction activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and
tribal monitor/consultant approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission
Indians-Kizh Nation. If the resources are Native American in origin, the
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation shall coordinate with the
landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically,
the Tribe will request reburial or preservation for educational purposes.
Work may continue on other parts of the Project while evaluation and, if
necessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA Guidelines Section15064.5 [f]). If
a resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a
“historical resource” or “unique archaeological resource”, time allotment and
funding sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidance measures, or
appropriate mitigation, must be available. The treatment plan established
for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5(f) for historical resources.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
During grading and
construction
On-site inspection,
other agency
permit/approval
TCR-5: Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of
treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include
implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to remove the
resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. Any
historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be
curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the
materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or
the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If
no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be offered to a
local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
During grading and
construction
Onsite inspection,
other agency
permit/approval
Page 99Page279
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 8
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
TCR-6: Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1)
as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or
skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in
PRC 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute. Health and
Safety Code 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material
shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and excavation halted
until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner
recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has
reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall
contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) and PRC 5097.98 shall be followed.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
During grading and
construction
On-site inspection,
other agency
permit/approval
Page 100Page280
RESOLUTION NO. 22-002
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW
DRC2019-00766, A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 159,580 SQUARE-
FOOT INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON A VACANT 7.39-
ACRE PARCEL WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT (IE)
DISTRICT, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF JERSEY
BOULEVARD AND MILLIKEN AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN
SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0229-111-60
A.Recitals.
1. The applicant, 11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC, filed an application for Design Review
DRC2019-00766, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the
subject Design Review is referred to as "the application."
2. On February 9, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a noticed public hearing on the 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 the Planning Commission during
the above-referenced public hearing on February 9, 2022, including written and oral staff reports,
together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a.The application applies to property located within the City; and
b.The application applies to an approximately 7.39-acre rectangular piece of land within
the Industrial Employment (IE) District, located at the northwest corner of Jersey Boulevard and
Milliken Avenue; and
c.The land use, General Plan Designation, and Zoning Designation for the subject
property and surrounding area is shown on the table below; and
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Vacant Neo Industrial Employment Industrial Employment
(IE) District
North Industrial/Warehouse
Buildings Neo Industrial Employment Neo Industrial (NI)
District
Exhibit J Page 101Page281
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.22-002
DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00766– 11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC
February 9, 2022
Page 2
South Fire Station and
Training Center Neo Industrial Employment Industrial Employment
(IE) District
East Industrial/Warehouse
Building Neo Industrial Employment Industrial Employment
(IE) District
West Industrial/Warehouse
Building Neo Industrial Employment Industrial Employment
(IE) District
d. The proposed project consists of the construction of a 159,580 square-foot
warehouse/distribution building and ancillary on-site improvements; and
e. The project complies with all pertinent development standards related to building
height, site coverage, front/rear setbacks, parking; and
f. The project complies with the landscaping requirements as prescribed in the
Development Code; and
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. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan. The site is
located within land designated as Neo Industrial Employment, which permits primarily light
industrial and low impact uses such as incubator spaces and small warehouses that are context
sensitive to the surrounding neighborhood. The project consists of a 159,580 square-foot
warehouse/distribution building surrounded by existing industrial uses. All site improvements,
including parking and landscaped areas, are designed to be consistent with the
warehouse/distribution use and are consistent with the Industrial Employment land use as
designated in the General Plan.
b. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the
purposes of the district in which the site is located. The Development Code designates the project
site as an Industrial Employment (IE) District. The proposed warehouse/distribution building for
the site is consistent with the land use intent of the Industrial Employment (IE) District. The zoning
of the adjacent sites to the property are within the Industrial Employment (IE) District and Neo
Industrial (NI) District and consist mainly of industrial buildings. The overall design of the new
building is similar in scale and intensity to neighboring lots. The height of the proposed building is
45 feet and does not exceed the maximum height allowed for other industrial buildings in the
Industrial Employment (IE) District. The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the entire site at buildout is 0.5
and will be generally consistent with other industrial properties in the area.
c. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the
Development Code. The building is designed for warehouse/distribution operations. The building
meets all setbacks, floor area ratio, height, and landscaping requirements. The building has been
designed to meet the City’s architectural standards. The project meets the minimum parking,
loading, and access requirements.
Page 102Page282
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.22-002
DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00766– 11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC
February 9, 2022
Page 3
d. The proposed use, 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. The site is surrounded by industrial/warehouse facilities of a similar
scale and intensity. Furthermore, the proposed building is substantially surrounded by existing
buildings. Operations on the site are expected to meet all Development Code standards regarding
noise and odor.
4. The Project was environmentally reviewed pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City’s Local CEQA Guidelines. The City
determined that an EIR would be required for the Project, and therefore prepared an
environmental impact report (EIR) that focused on the potentially significant effects of the Project.
By separate Resolution No. 22-001, the Planning Commission has: (i) made the required CEQA
findings and determinations, (ii) certified the Final EIR; and (iii) adopted a Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program for the Project. Resolution No. 22-001 is incorporated herein by
reference, and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. The documents and other materials
that constitute the record on which this determination was made are located in the Planning
Department and are in the custody of the Planning Director. Further, the mitigation measures set
forth therein are made applicable to the Project.
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 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Bryan Dopp, Chairman
ATTEST:
Matthew R. Burris, AICP, LEED, AP, Secretary
I, Matthew R. Burris, AICP, LEED, AP, 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 9th day of February 2022, by the
following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
Page 103Page283
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.22-002
DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00766– 11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC
February 9, 2022
Page 4
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Page 104Page284
Planning Department
Statement of Agreement and Acceptance
of Conditions of Approval for Design Review DRC2019-00766
I, Hannibal Petrossi, as applicant for Design Review DRC2019-00766 hereby state that I am in
agreement with and accept the conditions of approval for Design Review DRC2019-00766, for
property located at the northwest corner of Jersey Boulevard and Milliken Avenue, APN: 0229-
111-60, Rancho Cucamonga, California, as adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga on February 9, 2022 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 Resolution of Approval No. 22-002 for Design Review
DRC2019-00766 and Resolution of Approval No. 22-001 for the Environmental Impact Report
and Mitigation Monitoring Program.
Exhibit M Page 105Page285
Conditions of Approval
Community Development Department
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
Building plans shall demonstrate that all walls comply with wall height requirements, as outlined in
RCMC Chapter 17.48.
1.
Photometric plans submitted during building plan check shall comply with the City's outdoor and site
lighting standards, as outlined in RCMC Sec. 17.58.050.
2.
Design Review DRC2019-00766 is for the approval of a 159,580 square-foot industrial/warehouse
building, subdivided into four (4) suites. Any modifications to the square footage of the overall building,
size of suites, or the number of suites shall require Planning Department review and approval.
3.
Developer shall provide all prospective tenants a disclosure stating that fire and smoke are to be
expected to be visible from the subject property, as the property is located across from a City fire
training center. A draft copy of this disclosure shall be provided to the Planning Department for review,
prior to the issuance of building permits.
4.
Standard Conditions of Approval
All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections
shall be screened from all sides and the sound shall be buffered from adjacent properties and streets as
required by the Planning Department. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the
building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Any roof-mounted
mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically more than 18 inches above the roof or
roof parapet, shall be screened by an architecturally designed enclosure which exhibits a permanent
nature with the building design and is detailed consistent with the building. Any roof-mounted
mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically less than 18 inches above the roof or
roof parapet shall be painted consistent with the color scheme of the building. Details shall be included
in building plans.
5.
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.
6.
www.CityofRC.us
Printed: 2/1/2022
Exhibit L
Page 106Page286
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
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.
7.
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.
8.
The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of
Determination & Environmental Impact Report fee in the amount of $3,495.25. 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.
9.
Any approval shall expire if Building Permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within
2 years from the date of approval or a time extension has been granted.
10.
This project is subject to public art requirement outlined in Chapter 17.124 of the Development Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permits (for grading or construction), the applicant shall inform the
Planning Department of their choice to install public art, donate art or select the in-lieu option as outlined
in 17.124.020.D.
If the project developer chooses to pay the in-lieu fee, the in-lieu art fee will be invoiced on the building
permit by the City and shall be paid by the applicant prior to building permit issuance.
If the project developer chooses to install art, they shall submit, during the plan check process, an
application for the art work that will be installed on the project site that contains information applicable to
the art work in addition to any other information as may be required by the City to adequately evaluate
the proposed the art work in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 17.124.
If the project developer chooses to donate art, applications for art work donated to the City shall be
subject to review by the Public Art Committee which shall make a recommendation whether the
proposed donation is consistent with Chapter 17.124 and final acceptance by the City Council.
No final approval, such as a final inspection or the a issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, for any
development project (or if a multi-phased project, the final phase of a development project) that is
subject to this requirement shall occur unless the public art requirement has been fulfilled to the
satisfaction of the Planning Department.
11.
www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022 Page 107Page287
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the
case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for
Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits for the development or
prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. For development occurring in the Very
High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, the landscape plans will also be reviewed by Fire Construction
Services.
12.
Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right -of-way on the
perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer.
13.
A minimum of 20 percent of trees planted within industrial projects, and a minimum of 30 percent within
commercial and office projects, shall be specimen size trees - 24-inch box or larger.
14.
Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking stalls.15.
The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the
required landscape plans and shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval and
coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the
Engineering Services Department.
16.
Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for Planning Director review and approval
prior to issuance of Building Permits. These criteria shall encourage the natural growth characteristics
of the selected tree species.
17.
Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree per
30 linear feet of building.
18.
All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design
shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department.
19.
Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient
landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82.
20.
All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet.21.
All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and
exits shall be striped per City standards.
22.
The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. Any
signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall require separate
application and approval by the Planning Department prior to installation of any signs.
23.
Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other
applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and /or Master Plans in effect at
the time of Building Permit issuance.
24.
All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including
proper illumination and in conformance with Building and Safety Services Department standards, the
Municipal Code and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Department (RCFD) Standards.
25.
www.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022 Page 108Page288
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
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, and the Development Code
regulations.
26.
Downspouts shall not be visible from the exterior of any elevations of the buildings. All downspouts shall
be routed through the interior of the building walls.
27.
All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc ., shall be located
out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry
walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. For single -family
residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults.
28.
All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner,
homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance
shall be submitted for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department review and approved
prior to the issuance of Building Permits.
29.
A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Director and Police Department (909-477-2800 ) prior to the issuance of Building Permits .
Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to
adversely affect adjacent properties.
30.
Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all California Building Code and State
Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Services Department to show
compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance and final acceptance granted prior to
occupancy.
31.
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.
32.
Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of
Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
33.
Trash receptacle (s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and the
number of trash receptacles shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the
issuance of Building Permits.
34.
Engineering Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
Any existing public improvements that are damaged or substandard such as sidewalks, driveways, curb
& gutters, asphalt, etc, shall be removed and replaced to the current City Standards.
1.
www.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022 Page 109Page289
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
Developer shall limit vehicular access of the east driveway along Jersey Blvd to passenger cars only. All
truck access along Jersey Blvd shall be right -in, right-out only at the west driveway along this frontage .
Provide a driveway design to include an island median and all signing and striping to be reviewed
during the plan check process.
2.
Rail Spurs:
The City has a strong interest in creating urban trails that increase connectivity between neighborhoods,
workplaces, and other destinations. To that end, General Plan Policy CS -6.3 provides: “Continue to
incorporate, where feasible, regional and community trails along utility corridors and drainage
channels.” Further, the City supports the eventual closure and abandonment of railroad spurs to avoid
unnecessary crossings. A north /south railroad spur currently owned by the BNSF Railway (“BNSF”) is
located on portions of APNs 0229-111-15 and 0209-145-11 (the “Rail Spur”), immediately west of the
subject property (APN 0229-111-60). Although the applicant does not currently own the Rail Spur, the
City believes that BNSF may convey some or all of the Rail Spur to the applicant or a subsequent owner
of the subject property when the Rail Spur is no longer necessary for BNSF ’s operations. If BNSF
conveys some or all of the Rail Spur and the fee interest in the underlying real property immediately
adjacent to the subject property to the applicant or a subsequent owner, then the applicant or
subsequent owner shall make an irrevocable offer to dedicate such real property to the City for use as a
public trail. The applicant shall record a covenant against the subject property that implements the
terms of this condition.
3.
Standard Conditions of Approval
Easements for public sidewalks placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City.4.
Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards.5.
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.
6.
** CD Information Required Prior to Sign-Off for Building Permit
Prior to the issuance of building permits, if valuation is greater or equal to $100,000, a Diversion
Deposit and a related administrative fee shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion
Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 65% of all wastes generated during construction and
demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Applicant
must identify if they are self -hauling or utilizing Burrtec prior to issuance of a building permit. Proof of
diversion must be submitted to the Environmental Engineering Division within 60 days following the
completion of the construction and / or demolition project.
Contact Marissa Ostos, Environmental Engineering, at (909) 774-4062 for more information.
Instructions and forms are available at the City's website, www .cityofrc.us, under City Hall / Engineering /
Environmental Programs / Construction & Demolition Diversion Program.
7.
www.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022 Page 110Page290
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
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.
8.
Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to:
Curb & Gutter
A.C. Pvmt
Side-walk
Drive Appr.
Street Lights
etc.
Notes: (a) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check.
9.
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.
10.
Improvement Plans and Construction:
a. Street improvement plans, including street trees 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 street improvements, prior to the issuance of Building Permits.
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, and traffic signing shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
d. 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.
e. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to
City Standards, except for single-family residential lots.
11.
www.CityofRC.us Page 6 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022 Page 111Page291
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
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
Botanical Name
Common Name
Min. Grow Space
Spacing
Size
Qty.
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.
12.
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.
13.
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.
14.
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.
15.
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 issuance of Building Permits .
Formation costs shall be borne by the developer.
16.
Developer shall execute a Line Extension Agreement for electric service and shall construct electrical
distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and shall construct electrical distribution
facilities in accordance with such agreement and Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility requirements
and dedicate such facilities to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility. The Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Utility shall be the electrical service provider for all project related development.
17.
www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022 Page 112Page292
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
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.
18.
The separate parcels contained within the project boundaries shall be legally combined into one parcel
prior to issuance of Building Permits.
19.
Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
Locking and latching hardware for access doors is required to be operable from the exterior of the
building and is required to be single action latch/lock release on the interior of the building.
1.
Access doors are required to be identified in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-5. The Standard
has been uploaded to the Documents section.
2.
Access doors are required to be distributed along the exterior of the building such that the lineal
distance between adjacent access doors does not exceed 125 feet measured center to center.
3.
Required alarm systems and supervision systems are required to be in accordance with Fire District
Standard 9-3. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.
4.
Plans for the alarm and /or supervision (monitoring) system are required to be submitted separately and
issued a separate permit. Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for routing to the Fire
District.
5.
Plans for the egress lighting are required to be submitted separately and issued a separate permit .
Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for routing to the Fire District.
6.
Plans for high piled combustible storage are required to be submitted separately and issued a separate
permit. Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for routing to the Fire District.
7.
Plans for the private, onsite fire underground water infrastructure are required to be submitted
separately and issued a separate permit. Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for
routing to the Fire District.
8.
Plans for the public, offsite fire underground water infrastructure are required to be submitted separately
and issued a separate permit. Plans are required to be submitted prior to or concurrently with the
submittal of the Water District mylars. Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for routing to
the Fire District.
9.
Plans for the racks used for high piled combustible storage are required to be submitted separately and
issued a separate permit. Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for routing to the Fire
District.
10.
Plans for the sprinkler system are required to be submitted separately and issued a separate permit .
Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for routing to the Fire District.
11.
www.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022 Page 113Page293
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
Exterior doors and doors providing access to fire protection and life safety systems and equipment are
required to have identification signage in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-5. The Standard has
been uploaded to the Documents section.
12.
The location, size, construction materials, or other features of this building and the associated project
are such that adequate emergency responder radio coverage may not be achievable within the building
that is proposed. It is highly recommended that a radio signal strength assessment is completed by San
Bernardino County Information Services Department (ISD). Please contact Tim Trager with County ISD
at 909-388-5563 or ttrager@isd.sbcounty.gov
Upon substantial completion and final completion of construction, the fire code official will oversee a
radio signal strength test that is in accordance with the California Fire Code. If acceptable radio
coverage cannot be achieved after construction is completed, equipment necessary to increase the
radio signal strength or otherwise allow adequate emergency responder radio communication will be
required to be installed.
13.
Designated and conforming aerial apparatus access is required in accordance with Fire District
Standard 5-1. Show aerial apparatus access on the fire access plan. The Standard has been uploaded
to the Documents section.
14.
Fire apparatus access (fire lane) design, construction, and identification are required to be in
accordance with Fire District Standard 5-1. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents
section.
15.
Fire extinguishers are required in accordance with Section 906 of the California Fire Code. Consult with
the Fire Inspector for the correct type, size, and exact installation locations.
16.
Fire flow information for this project is obtained from the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD).
CVWD can be reached at 909-944-6000 or custserv@cvwdwater.com.
17.
Fire flow is required to be in accordance with Appendix B of the California Fire Code. The Fire District
has adopted the appendix without local amendments. Proof of the availability of the required fire flow
must be provided to the Fire District in the form of a letter or written report dated within the past 12
months.
18.
Fire sprinkler are required to be installed in accordance with Fire District Standard 9-5. The Standard
has been uploaded to the Documents section.
19.
Gates installed across a commercial /industrial emergency vehicle access road (fire lane) are required
to be in accordance with Standard 5-4. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.
20.
A Knox Box key box is required in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-9. Additional boxes may be
required depending on the size of the building, the location of fire protection and life safety system
controls, and the operational needs of the Fire District. The Standard has been uploaded to the
Documents section. If an installed Knox Box is available to this project or business, keys for the
building/suite/unit are required to be provided to the Fire Inspector at the final inspection.
21.
www.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022 Page 114Page294
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
Coordinate landscaping with the roof access ladder points and address signage. Landscaping cannot
obstruct roof access or clear visibility of address signage from time of installation to maturity of the
shrubs and trees.
22.
A fire service site plan is required in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-11. The Standard has
been uploaded to the Documents section.
23.
Roof access is required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-6. The Standard has been
uploaded to the Documents section.
24.
Street address and unit /suite signage for commercial and industrial buildings are required to be in
accordance with Fire District Standard 5-8. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents
section.
25.
Identification of fire protection systems and components, fire alarm systems and components, and
equipment and devices associated with fire and life safety systems is required to be in accordance with
Fire District Standards 5-5 and 5-10. The Standards have been uploaded to the Documents section.
26.
Fire apparatus access roads (fire lanes) can be included in an engineered onsite storm water retention
plan. The ponding of storm water shall not exceed a designed depth of four (4) inches in the designated
fire apparatus access road (s) and the area between the fire apparatus access road (s) and the exterior
walls of all normally occupied buildings.
27.
Public and private fire service water mains, public and private hydrants, water control valves, fire
sprinkler risers, fire department connections (FDCs), and other fire protection water related devices and
equipment are required to be provided, designed, and installed in accordance with Fire District
Standard 5-10. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.
28.
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 and T-24 energy calcualtions to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the
current edition of the California Building and Fire Codes including all local ordinances and standards .
The new structure is required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. A soils report is required for
new structures. Disabled access to the site and building must be provided in accordance to the State of
California published thresholds at the time of plan check submittal
1.
Grading Section
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
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.
1.
Standard Conditions of Approval
www.CityofRC.us Page 10 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022 Page 115Page295
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
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.
2.
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.
3.
The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be
completed, submitted, and approved by the City Engineer, or designee, prior to the issuance of building
permits.
4.
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.
5.
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.
6.
If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan /Permit are submitted to the Engineering Services for review, the
rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage
Plan/Permit.
7.
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.
8.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility
path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance
with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail
including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building
Code.
9.
The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible,
and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings.
10.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking
stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current
adopted California Building Code.
11.
This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building
Code.
12.
www.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022 Page 116Page296
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
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.
13.
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.
14.
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.
15.
Prior to approval of the project -specific storm water quality management plan, the applicant shall submit
to the City Engineer, or his designee, 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.
16.
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, or his designee 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.
17.
Roof water is not permitted to flow over the public parkway and shall be directed to an under parkway
culvert per City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements prior to issuance of a grading permit.
18.
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.
19.
www.CityofRC.us Page 12 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022 Page 117Page297
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
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).
20.
Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of
the project Conditions of Approval.
21.
Prior to the issuance of a 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, or his designee, and recorded with the County Recorder’s Office.
22.
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.
23.
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.
24.
The land owner 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 land owner 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 land owner.
25.
The land owner 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 land owner 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 land owner.
26.
The land/property owner 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.
27.
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 grading permit or any building permit.
28.
The Site and Drainage Plan in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan shall show the
locations of all roof downspout drains. if required for storm water quality purposes, the downspouts shall
include filters.
29.
www.CityofRC.us Page 13 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022 Page 118Page298
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
Prior to the issuance of a building permit or Engineering Services Department issued right of way
permit, 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.
30.
Prior to the start of landscaping operations, the landscape architect and the landscape contractor shall
provide a sample of the weed fabric barrier to the Project Planner, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Department. The weed barrier shall be permeable.
31.
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.
32.
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.
33.
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”.
34.
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”.
35.
www.CityofRC.us Page 14 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022 Page 119Page299
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
GROUND WATER PROTECTION:
Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP
document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No .
R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm
Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads:
Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection):
Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to
primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer
strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect
groundwater:
a.Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of
ground water quality objectives.
b.Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater
quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior
to infiltration.
c.Adequate pretreatment of runoff prior to infiltration shall be required in gas stations and large
commercial parking lots. (NOTE: The State Water Quality Control Board defines a large commercial
parking lot as ‘100,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial development to include parking lot (with 100 or
more vehicle traffics ), OR, by means of 5,000sqft or more of allowable space designated for parking
purposes’).
d.Unless adequate pre -treatment of runoff is provided prior to infiltration structural infiltration treatment
BMPs must not be used for areas of industrial or light industrial activity{77}, areas subject to high
vehicular traffic (25,000 or more daily traffic ); car washes; fleet storage areas; nurseries; or any other
high threat to water quality land uses or activities.
e.Class V injection wells or dry wells must not be placed in areas subject to vehicular{78} repair or
maintenance activities{79}, such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used
car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does
any vehicular repair work.
f.Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have soil and
groundwater contamination.
g.Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water
supply wells.
h.The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high
groundwater mark shall be at least 10-feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial
uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained.
i.Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water
Code Section 13050.
36.
www.CityofRC.us Page 15 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022 Page 120Page300
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
NONRESIDENTIAL MANDATORY MEASURES – CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS
CODE – Prior to the issuance of any building permit the applicant shall comply with Section 5.106.10
(Grading and paving) of the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code:
Construction plans shall indicate how site grading or a drainage system will manage all surface water
flows to keep water from entering buildings. 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.
37.
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 designee.
38.
(Grd.100) Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall show on the site plan and the
permitted grading plan set for non -residential projects the designated parking for clean air vehicles per
the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code, section 5.106.5.2.
39.
(Grd.017) 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”.
40.
(Grd.101) Prior to issuance of a grading permit for non -residential projects the applicant shall show on
the electrical plans and the permitted grading plan set the location for a future installation of an Electric
Vehicle (EV) charging station/parking area per the current adopted California Green Building
Standards Code, section 5.106.5.3.
41.
www.CityofRC.us Page 16 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022 Page 121Page301
Page 302
Page 303
Page 304
Page 305
Page 306
Page 307
Page 308
Via Email and Overnight Mail
February 17, 2022
Chair Oaxaca
Vice Chair Dopp
Commissioner Guglielmo
Commissioner Morales
Commissioner Williams
Planning Commission
Attn: Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Elizabeth.Thornhill@cityofrc.us
Janice Reynolds, City Clerk
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
City.clerk@cityofrc.us
Re: Appeal of Decision of the Planning Commission to Approve Design Review
DRC2019-00766 for the Jersey Boulevard Industrial Complex Project
Dear Chair Oaxaca, Vice Chair Dopp, Honorable Commissioners, Ms. Reynolds, and Ms. Thornhill:
I am writing on behalf of the Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (“SAFER”)
and its members living and/or working in or around the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“City”) regarding
the Planning Commission’s decisions of February 9, 2022 to approve Design Review DRC2019-00590
for the Jersey Boulevard Industrial Complex Project, a 159,580 square foot warehouse/storage building
located at Milliken Avenue and Jersey Boulevard (“Project”), and to adopt the Environmental Impact
Report (“EIR”) prepared for the Project.
This appeal is filed pursuant to Municipal Code section 17.14.070, is timely filed within 10 days
of the Planning Commission’s decision, and is accompanied by the required filing fee of $3,279. The
reasons for the appeal are set forth in the attached letter, which was submitted to the Planning
Commission prior to its decision.
Sincerely,
Victoria Yundt
LOZEAU DRURY LLP
Page 309
Via E-Mail
February 8, 2022
Chair Oaxaca
Vice Chair Dopp
Commissioner Guglielmo
Commissioner Morales
Commissioner Williams
Planning Commission
Attn: Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Elizabeth.Thornhill@cityofrc.us
Janice Reynolds, City Clerk
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
City.clerk@cityofrc.us
Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner
Planning Department
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
vicent.acuna@cityofrc.us
RE: Comment on the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Jersey
Boulevard Industrial Complex Project (SCH No. 2021060608)
Dear Chair Oaxaca, Vice Chair Dopp, Honorable Commissioners, Ms. Reynolds, Ms. Thornhill,
and Mr. Acuna:
I am writing on behalf of the Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility
(“SAFER”), a California nonprofit benefit corporation, including their members that live and
work in and around Rancho Cucamonga regarding the Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”)
prepared for the Jersey Boulevard Industrial Complex Project (“Project”) located at the
northwest corner of Milliken Avenue and Jersey Boulevard (APN 0229-111-60-0-000) located in
the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“City”). After reviewing the EIR, we conclude that it fails to
analyze all environmental impacts and implement all necessary mitigation measures. SAFER
respectfully requests that the City withdraw the Final EIR (“FEIR”) and instead prepare a revised
draft environmental impact report (“RDEIR”) and recirculate the RDEIR prior to considering
approvals for the Project.
Page 310
Comment re: Jersey Industrial Complex Project EIR
February 8, 2022
Page 2 of 11
These comments have been prepared with the assistance of wildlife biologist Shawn
Smallwood, Ph.D., and environmental consulting firm Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise
(“SWAPE”). Dr. Smallwood’s comment and curriculum vitae are attached as Exhibit A hereto
and are incorporated herein by reference and entirety. SWAPE’s comment and curriculum vitae
are attached as Exhibit B hereto and are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety.
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project proposes to construct a 159,580 square foot warehouse/storage building,
composed of 143,014 square feet of storage in four separate units, 8,127 square feet of
mezzanine storage, 8,127 square feet of office space (i.e., divided into four separate spaces, one
for each storage unit), and a 312 square foot electrical room, and 98 parking spaces, on a 7.39-
acre site at the northwest corner of Milliken Avenue and Jersey Boulevard. The building would
be oriented east/west with vehicle access to office space fronting the building from Jersey
Boulevard. Truck access to the loading docks located at the rear of the building would be
provided from Milliken Avenue.
In 2019, the Project applicant submitted an application package for Design Review (DR)
associated with the construction and operation of the new warehouse building proposed for the
northwest corner of Jersey Boulevard and Milliken Avenue in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. A
total of 98 parking spaces would be provided. As part of the Design Review (DRC2019-00766)
process, an Initial Study and related technical reports were submitted to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga to facilitate compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The Initial Study and related technical reports were circulated for public review from April 13,
2021, to May 12, 2021 (SCH# 2021040209). Based on comments received addressing
Greenhouse Gas emission calculations and the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis, the City
determined that an EIR is required based on the Project’s potential to create short-term, long-
term, and cumulative impacts. The EIR addresses only those environmental topical areas that
could be significantly impacted by the Project based on information presented in the 2021 CEQA
Initial Study Checklist. Implementation of the proposed Project requires approval of an EIR.
II. LEGAL STANDARD
CEQA requires that an agency analyze the potential environmental impacts of its
proposed actions in an EIR (except in certain limited circumstances). (See, e.g., Pub. Res. Code
[“PRC”] § 21100.) The EIR is the very heart of CEQA. (Dunn-Edwards v. BAAQMD (1992) 9
Cal.App.4th 644, 652.) “The ‘foremost principle’ in interpreting CEQA is that the Legislature
intended the act to be read so as to afford the fullest possible protection to the environment
within the reasonable scope of the statutory language.” (Communities for a Better Environment
v. Calif. Resources Agency (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 98, 109.)
CEQA has two primary purposes. First, CEQA is designed to inform decision makers
and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of a project. (14 Cal. Code
Regs. [“CCR”] § 15002(a)(1) [CEQA Guidelines].) “Its purpose is to inform the public and its
responsible officials of the environmental consequences of their decisions before they are made.
Thus, the EIR ‘protects not only the environment but also informed self-government.’” (Citizens
of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 564.) The EIR has been
described as “an environmental ‘alarm bell’ whose purpose it is to alert the public and its
Page 311
Comment re: Jersey Industrial Complex Project EIR
February 8, 2022
Page 3 of 11
responsible officials to environmental changes before they have reached ecological points of no
return.” (Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay v. Bd. of Port Comm’rs. (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 1344,
1354 (“Berkeley Jets”); County of Inyo v. Yorty (1973) 32 Cal.App.3d 795, 810.)
Second, CEQA requires public agencies to avoid or reduce environmental damage when
“feasible” by requiring “environmentally superior” alternatives and all feasible mitigation
measures. (14 CCR § 15002(a)(2) & (3); see also, Berkeley Jets, 91 Cal.App.4th at 1344, 1354;
Citizens of Goleta Valley, 52 Cal.3d at 564.) The EIR serves to provide agencies and the public
with information about the environmental impacts of a proposed project and to “identify ways
that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced.” (14 CCR § 15002(a)(2).) If
the project will have a significant effect on the environment, the agency may approve the project
only if it finds that it has “eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the
environment where feasible” and that any unavoidable significant effects on the environment are
“acceptable due to overriding concerns.” (PRC § 21081; 14 CCR § 15092(b)(2)(A) & (B).) The
lead agency may deem a particular impact to be insignificant only if it produces rigorous analysis
and concrete substantial evidence justifying the finding. (Kings County Farm Bureau v. City of
Hanford (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 692, 732.)
While the courts review an EIR using an “abuse of discretion” standard, “the reviewing
court is not to ‘uncritically rely on every study or analysis presented by a project proponent in
support of its position. A clearly inadequate or unsupported study is entitled to no judicial
deference.’” (Berkeley Jets, 91 Cal.App.4th at 1355 [quoting Laurel Heights Improvement Assn.
v. Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 391, 409, fn.12].) As the court
stated in Berkeley Jets:
A prejudicial abuse of discretion occurs “if the failure to include relevant
information precludes informed decisionmaking and informed public
participation, thereby thwarting the statutory goals of the EIR process.” (Id. at
1355 [citing San Joaquin Raptor/Wildlife Rescue Center v. County of Stanislaus
(1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 713, 722; Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Peninsula Water
Management Dist. (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 1109, 1117; County of Amador v. El
Dorado County Water Agency (1999) 76 Cal. App. 4th 931, 946].)
More recently, the California Supreme Court has emphasized that:
When reviewing whether a discussion is sufficient to satisfy CEQA, a court must
be satisfied that the EIR (1) includes sufficient detail to enable those who did not
participate in its preparation to understand and to consider meaningfully the issues
the proposed project raises [citation omitted], and (2) makes a reasonable effort to
substantively connect a project's air quality impacts to likely health consequences.
(Sierra Club v. Cty. of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal.5th 502, 510 [citing Laurel Heights Improvement
Assn. v. Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 405].) “Whether or not the
alleged inadequacy is the complete omission of a required discussion or a patentl y inadequate
one-paragraph discussion devoid of analysis, the reviewing court must decide whether the EIR
serves its purpose as an informational document.” (Sierra Club v. Cty. of Fresno, 6 Cal.5th at
516.) Although an agency has discretion to decide the manner of discussing potentially
significant effects in an EIR, “a reviewing court must determine whether the discussion of a
Page 312
Comment re: Jersey Industrial Complex Project EIR
February 8, 2022
Page 4 of 11
potentially significant effect is sufficient or insufficient, i.e., whether the EIR comports with its
intended function of including ‘detail sufficient to enable those who did not participate in its
preparation to understand and to consider meaningfully the issues raised by the proposed
project.’” (Id. [citing Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield (2004) 124
Cal.App.4th 1184, 1197.]) “The determination whether a discussion is sufficient is not solely a
matter of discerning whether there is substantial evidence to support the agency’s factual
conclusions.” (Id.) Whether a discussion of a potential impact is sufficient “presents a mixed
question of law and fact. As such, it is generally subject to independent review. However,
underlying factual determinations—including, for example, an agency’s decision as to which
methodologies to employ for analyzing an environmental effect—may warrant deference.” (Id.)
As the Court emphasized:
[W]hether a description of an environmental impact is insufficient because it
lacks analysis or omits the magnitude of the impact is not a substantial evidence
question. A conclusory discussion of an environmental impact that an EIR deems
significant can be determined by a court to be inadequate as an informational
document without reference to substantial evidence.
(Id. at 514.)
III. DISCUSSION
A. The EIR Fails to Establish an Accurate Baseline for Sensitive Biological
Resources and Fails to Disclose and Properly Mitigate Impacts of the Project
on Numerous Sensitive Species.
Wildlife biologist Dr. Shawn Smallwood, Ph.D., concludes that the Project may have
significant impacts on several special-status species and non-special status species. A RDEIR is
required to mitigate these impacts. Dr. Smallwood’s conclusions were informed by wildlife
biologist Noriko Smallwood’s site visit in June 2021. (See, Ex. A, pp. 1-13.) Ms. Smallwood
visited the site of the proposed Project on Dr. Smallwood’s behalf for nearly 2 hours from 06:26
to 08:16 hours on June 16, 2021. (Id.) Dr. Smallwood’s expert comments and curriculum vitae
are attached hereto as Exhibit A.
1. The EIR fails to establish an accurate baseline for sensitive biological
resources.
The DEIR and FEIR rely on the Habitat Assessment at Appendix C, which states that
“[b]ased on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of on-site
habitats, it was determined that the proposed project site has a low potential to support Cooper’s
hawk [] and California horned lark []. All remaining special-status wildlife species are presumed
to be absent from the project site due to lack of quality habitat.” (DEIR, Appx. C, p. 7; see also
DEIR, p. 4-38.) However, the DEIR adopts this conclusion by relyin g on a single habitat survey
conducted on the site on May 14, 2020, during which no special-status species were observed
on-site. (Id.) Dr. Smallwood points out numerous flaws with the DEIR’s biological assessment.
First, according to Dr. Smallwood, “[t]he reporting of the site survey did not include the
most basic information that a wildlife ecologist would need for assessing whether the survey
Page 313
Comment re: Jersey Industrial Complex Project EIR
February 8, 2022
Page 5 of 11
truly met due diligence standards.” (Ex. A, p. 6.) As such, “[a] much more rigorous survey and
reporting effort is warranted.” (Id.)
Second, the DEIR improperly concluded that “the Project site and surrounding areas
provide limited foraging and nesting habitat for year-round and seasonal birds and migrating
songbirds,” because “[n]o active nests or birds displaying nesting behavior were observed during
the field investigation.” (DEIR, p. 4-38.) However, “Noriko, on the other hand, photographed a
juvenile black phoebe,” (Ex. A, p. 10 [citing p. 5, Photo 8]), “observed mourning doves
copulating on the project site where the doves had a nest, and observed a northern mockingbird
defending its territory against common ravens, one of which also exhibited behaviors typical of
nesting.” (Id., p. 10.) According to Dr. Smallwood, the Habitat Assessment’s “failure to detect
signs of avian nesting is inexplicable, other than the possibility that [the surveyor] ELMT spent
very little time to survey the site.” (Id.; see also id., p. 14.)
Third, the DEIR asserts that the Project plans to improperly rely on a future
preconstruction survey to determine “the presence/absence of burrowing owl” on the Project site.
(DEIR, p. 4-39.) However, such an “assertion is misleading because preconstruction surveys are
not performed for the purpose of determining presence or absence [of] a species.” (Ex. A, p. 10.)
As Dr. Smallwood explains:
Preconstruction surveys are performed solely for the purpose of avoiding take of
plants or animals that are readily detectable and collectable just prior to
construction grading. To determine presence or absence of a species, detection
surveys designed for this purpose must be implemented. In the case of burrowing
owl, the CDFW (2012) survey protocol would need to be implemented. A
preconstruction survey cannot serve as a surrogate or substitute for detection
surveys, and City of Rancho Cucamonga should not characterize them as such.
(Id., p. 10.)
Fourth, neither the DEIR nor the Habitat Assessment make use of the available data on
wildlife observations in the area. (Ex. A, pp. 10-14; see also DEIR, Appx. C, p. 7; DEIR, pp. 4-
38–4-39.) Instead, the DEIR and Habitat Assessment solely relies on a query to the California
Natural Diversity Database (“CNDDB”) but fails to take advantage of other databases such as
eBird and iNaturalist that gather site specific expert and birder knowledge. (Ex. A, p. 10; id. pp.
11-13, Table 2; DEIR, Appx. C, p. 7; DEIR, pp. 4-38–4-39.) The DEIR and FEIR are therefore
incomplete in its search of available data on special-status species occurrences. (Ex. A, pp. 1-13.)
Thus, the current environmental setting needs to be accurately characterized in RDEIR so
that an appropriate impact analysis on biological resources from the Project can be completed.
Furthermore, since “most special-status species are rare and cryptic, and because most species
are expert at hiding their nests lest they get predated,” Dr. Smallwood recommends that detection
surveys be performed for breeding birds “to inform preconstruction take-avoidance surveys by
mapping out where biologists performing preconstruction surveys are most likely to find animals
before the tractor blade finds them.” (Ex. A, pp. 18-19.)
Page 314
Comment re: Jersey Industrial Complex Project EIR
February 8, 2022
Page 6 of 11
2. The EIR fails to address the Project’s potential significant impact on
loss of breeding capacity.
Neither the DEIR, FEIR, nor the Habitat Assessment adequately assess the lost breeding
capacity of nesting birds that would result from the Project. (See, Ex. A, pp. 14-15.) In so doing,
the EIR fails to analyze the impact of habitat loss, or the loss of productive capacity on bird
species likely to nest on the ground within the Project area. (Id.) While habitat loss results in the
immediate numerical decline of birds and other animals, it also results in a permanent loss of
productive capacity. (Id., p. 14.) Dr. Smallwood cites a recent study that documented a “29%
decline in overall bird abundance across North America over the last 48 years,” a decline which
he says was “driven by multiple factors, but principally attributed to habitat loss and habitat
fragmentation.” (Id. [citing Rosenberg et al. 2019].)
Here, the DEIR claims that, other than for killdeer which nest on the ground, nesting
potential exists only in the trees scattered beyond the site’s perimeter. (DEIR, p. 4-38.) In reality,
however, Dr. Smallwood found that “the DEIR mischaracterizes the number of species that nest
on the ground,” because “[m]any bird species are ground-nesters, including mourning doves at
the site.” (Ex. A, p. 14.) Dr. Smallwood cites two studies that show bird nesting densities that
were between 32.8 and 35.8 bird nests per acre, for an average of 34.3 bird nests per acre. (Id.
[citing Young (1948) & Yahner (1982), respectively].) Assuming nesting density at the Project
site is a fifth of the average reported, then based on 6.8 bird nests per acre multiplied by the
Project’s 7.39 acres of habit, Dr. Smallwood predicts that 50 bird nests produce new birds at the
site annually. Based on an average of 2.9 fledglings per nest, the Project would prevent the
production of 145 new birds per year. (Id., p. 14 [citing Young (1948)].) Based on Dr.
Smallwood’s calculations, “[a]fter 100 years and further assuming an average bird generation
time of 5 years, the lost capacity of both breeders and annual fledgling production would total
16,500 birds.” (Id., p. 14 [emphasis added].)
The potential loss of 16,500 birds in California over the first century following
construction of this Project easily qualifies as a significant and substantial impact that has not
been analyzed. A RDEIR is required to fully analyze the Project’s impact on lost breeding
capacity, and to mitigate that impact. Dr. Smallwood recommends, at a minimum, substantial
compensatory mitigation is needed in response to the Project’s impacts from habitat loss,
including impacts to birds and bats using the site as stop-over or staging during migration. (Ex.
A, p. 19.)
3. The EIR inadequately analyzed the Project’s impact on wildlife
movement.
The DEIR concludes that the Project would have “no impact” on wildlife corridors
because “[t]he project site is isolated from regional wildlife corridors and linkages, and there are
no riparian corridors, creeks, or useful patches of steppingstone habitat (natural areas) within or
connecting the Project site to any identified wildlife corridors or linkages.” (DEIR, p. 5-7; DEIR,
Appx. C, pp. 5-6.) However, the CEQA standard is whether a project would interfere with
wildlife movement in the region. As Dr. Smallwood explains, “[t]he primary phrase of the
CEQA standard goes to wildlife movement regardless of whether the movement is channeled by
a corridor.” (Ex. A, p. 15.) Wildlife movement includes stopover habitat used by birds and bats,
and staging habitat during dispersal, and migration or home range patrol. (Id.) Dr. Smallwood
Page 315
Comment re: Jersey Industrial Complex Project EIR
February 8, 2022
Page 7 of 11
notes that many species of wildlife likely use the Project site for movement across the region and
the Project would cut wildlife off from stopover and staging habitat, lengthening the distances
wildlife must travel before finding alternate stopover habitat. (Id.) Therefore, the Project would
interfere with wildlife movement in the region and an RDEIR must be prepared to address this
impact and mitigate it accordingly. In addition, Dr. Smallwood recommends, at a minimum,
substantial compensatory mitigation is needed in response to the Project’s impacts from
interference with wildlife movement, including impacts to birds and bats using the site as stop-
over or staging during migration. (Ex. A, p. 19.)
4. The EIR fails to address the impacts on wildlife from additional
traffic generated by the Project.
The EIR fails to analyze one of the most important potential Project impacts to wildlife:
wildlife mortality from Project-generated traffic. (See, Ex. A, pp. 15-18.) As Dr. Smallwood
points out:
According to Mizuta Traffic Consulting (MTC 2020), the project would generate
an average daily trip (ADT) rate of 182 passenger cars and 96 trucks. However,
neither MTC (2020, 2021) nor the DEIR report any prediction of vehicle miles
traveled (VMT). Thus, the DEIR provides only a weak basis for estimating the
possible extent of project impacts to wildlife along roads. (Ex. A, p. 15.)
Based on studies of traffic-caused wildlife mortality, Dr. Smallwood estimates that the Project-
generated traffic would cause “3,608 wildlife fatalities per year,” and “[o]perations over 50
years would accumulate 180,400 wildlife fatalities.” (Id., pp. 17-18 [emphasis added].)
Vehicle collisions with special-status species is not a minor issue, but rather results in the
deaths of millions of species each year. Dr. Smallwood explains:
Across North America, traffic impacts have taken devastating tolls on wildlife
(Forman et al. 2003). In Canada, 3,562 birds were estimated killed per 100 km of
road per year (Bishop and Brogan 2013), and the US estimate of avian mortality
on roads is 2,200 to 8,405 deaths per 100 km per year, or 89 million to 340
million total per year (Loss et al. 2014). Local or regional impacts can be more
intense than at the national level. (Id., pp. 15-16.)
Especially due to the special-status bird species likely to occur at or near the Project site, these
collisions represent a significant impact to wildlife that has not been addressed, discussed, or
mitigated in the DEIR. A RDEIR is needed to analyze and mitigate this significant impact on
wildlife. In addition, Dr. Smallwood points out that “[m]itigation measures to improve wildlife
safety along roads are available and are feasible, and they need exploration for their suitability
with the proposed project.” (Ex. A, pp. 18, 20.)
5. The EIR fails to adequately address the Project’s cumulative impacts
on wildlife in the region.
The DEIR fails to consider cumulative impacts on wildlife from the Project. (Ex. A, p.
18.) According to Dr. Smallwood:
Page 316
Comment re: Jersey Industrial Complex Project EIR
February 8, 2022
Page 8 of 11
The DEIR provides no analysis of cumulative impacts to biological resources
other than to imply that cumulative impacts are really just residual impacts of
incomplete mitigation of project-level impacts. If that was CEQA’s standard, then
cumulative effects analysis would be merely an analysis of mitigation efficacy.
And if that was the standard, then I must point out that none of the project-level
impacts would be offset to any degree by the proposed preconstruction surveys to
be performed for nesting birds. But the DEIR’s implied standard is not the
standard of analysis of cumulative effects. CEQA defines cumulative impacts, and
it outlines two general approaches for performing the analysis. The DEIR needs to
be revised, and it needs to include an appropriate, serious analysis of cumulative
impacts. (Id.)
Thus, the DEIR needs to be revised to adequately address the Project’s contributions to
cumulative impacts on wildlife in the region and to mitigate those impacts accordingly. (Id.)
B. The EIR Fails to Adequately Address and Mitigate the Significant Air
Quality, Health Risk, and Greenhouse Gas Impacts of the Project.
Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., and Dr. Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D., of the environmental
consulting firm SWAPE reviewed the DEIR, FEIR, and associated appendices’ analysis of the
Project’s air quality, health risk, and greenhouse gases (“GHG”) impacts and found that the EIR
fails to adequately evaluate these impacts of the Project. (See, Ex. B, pp. 1-10.) As a result,
SWAPE concluded that a revised DEIR needs to be prepared to adequately assess and mitigate
air quality, health risk, and GHG impacts that the Project may have on the surrounding
environment. (Id., p. 1.) SWAPE’s comment letter and CVs are attached as Exhibit B.
1. The EIR relies on unsubstantiated input parameters to estimate
Project emissions and thus the Project will result in significant air
quality impacts.
SWAPE found that the DEIR underestimated the Project’s emissions and therefore
cannot be relied upon to determine the significance of the Project’s air quality impacts. (See, Ex.
B, pp. 1-4.) The DEIR relies on emissions calculated from the California Emissions Estimator
Model Version CalEEMod.2020.4.0 (“CalEEMod”). (DEIR, p. 4-14.) This model, which is used
to generate a project’s construction and operational emissions, relies on recommended default
values based on site specific information related to a number of factors. (Ex. B, pp. 1-2.) CEQA
requires any changes to the default values to be justified by substantial evidence. (Id., p. 2.)
SWAPE reviewed the DEIR’s CalEEMod output files, provided in the Air Quality Report
as Appendix B to the DEIR, and found that the values input into the model were inconsistent
with information provided in the DEIR. (Id.) This results in an underestimation of the Project’s
emissions. (Id.) As a result, the DEIR’s air quality analysis cannot be relied upon to determine
the Project’s emissions.
Specifically, SWAPE found that the following values used in the DEIR’s air quality
analysis were either inconsistent with information provided in the DEIR or otherwise unjustified:
Page 317
Comment re: Jersey Industrial Complex Project EIR
February 8, 2022
Page 9 of 11
1. Failure to model all proposed land uses. (Ex. B, pp. 2-3.)
2. Incorrect application of area-related operational mitigation measures. (Ex.
B, pp. 3-5.)
As a result of these errors in the DEIR, the Project’s construction and operational
emissions are underestimated and cannot be relied upon to determine the significance of the
Project’s air quality impacts. (Id., pp. 4-5.) A RDEIR is needed to adequately address and
mitigate the significant air quality impacts of the Project.
2. The EIR fails to adequately evaluate health risk impacts from diesel
particulate matter emissions.
One of the primary emissions of concern regarding health effects for land development
projects is diesel particulate matter (“DPM”), which can be released during Project construction
and operation. DPM consists of fine particles with a diameter less than 2.5 micrometers
including a subgroup of ultrafine particles (with a diameter less than 0.1 micrometers). Diesel
exhaust also contains a variety of harmful gasses and cancer-causing substances. Exposure to
DPM is a recognized health hazard, particularly to children whose lungs are still developing and
the elderly who may have other serious health problems. According to the California Air
Resources Board (“CARB”), DPM exposure may lead to the following adverse health effects:
aggravated asthma; chronic bronchitis; increased respiratory and cardiovascular hospitalizations;
decreased lung function in children; lung cancer; and premature deaths for those with heart or
lung disease.
The DEIR concludes that the proposed Project would have a less-than-significant health
risk impact without conducting a quantified construction or operational health risk analysis
(“HRA”). (DEIR, pp. 4-22–4-24; see also Ex. B, pp. 5-7.) Specifically, regarding potential
health risk impacts associated with Project construction, the DEIR justifies its “less-than-
significant” health risk impact conclusion by explaining that “the short-term construction
duration would not result in substantial toxic air contaminant (“TAC”).” (Ex. B, p. 5 [citing
DEIR, pp. 4-22–4-23].) Additionally, “the DEIR concludes that the Project would result in a
less-than-significant operational health risk impact because the nearest sensitive receptor is
located a half mile from the Project site and the traffic volumes along Milliken Avenue are less
than the CARB recommended threshold.” (Ex. B, p. 5 [citing DEIR, pp. 4-23–4-24].)
However, SWAPE’s review of the DEIR and its evaluation of potential health risk
impacts for the Project found that the DEIR incorrectly concluded that the Project would have a
less-than-significant health risk impact on nearby receptors, and completely failed to conduct a
quantified construction or operational HRA. (Ex. B, pp. 5-7.) SWAPE concluded that the DEIR’s
evaluation of the Project’s potential health impacts, as well as the less-than-significant health
impact conclusion, is incorrect for several reasons. (Id.)
First, the DEIR fails to quantitatively evaluate construction-related and operational TAC
emissions, or make a reasonable effort to connect emissions to health impacts posed to nearby
existing sensitive receptors. (Ex. B, p. 6.) SWAPE identifies potential emissions from both the
exhaust stacks of construction equipment and daily vehicle trips. (Id.) In failing to connect TAC
emissions to potential health risks to nearby sensitive receptors, the Project fails to meet the
Page 318
Comment re: Jersey Industrial Complex Project EIR
February 8, 2022
Page 10 of 11
CEQA requirement that projects correlate increases in project-generated emissions to adverse
impacts on human health caused by those emissions. (Id.; see also, Sierra Club v. County of
Fresno (2018) 6 Cal.5th 502, 510.)
Second, by failing to prepare a quantified construction and operational HRA, the Project
is inconsistent with CEQA’s requirement to correlate the increase in emissions that the Project
would generate to the adverse impacts on human health caused by those emissions. (Ex. B, p. 6.)
The DEIR’s conclusion is also inconsistent with recommendations set forth by the Office of
Health Hazard Assessment’s (“OEHHA”) most recent Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance
Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments, which was formally adopted in March of
2015. (See, “Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk
Assessments.” OEHHA, Feb 2015 [available at:
https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf].) OEHHA recommends
that projects lasting at least 2 months be evaluated for cancer risks to nearby sensitive receptors,
a time period which this Project easily exceeds. (Ex. B, p. 6.) The OEHHA document also
recommends that if a project is expected to last over 6 months, the exposure should be evaluated
throughout the project using a 30-year exposure duration to estimate individual cancer risks. (Id.)
Based on its extensive experience, SWAPE reasonably assumes that the Project will last at least
30 years, and therefore recommends that health risk impacts from the project be evaluated in a
revised DEIR. Id. A RDEIR is therefore required to analyze and mitigate these impacts. (Id.)
Third, by claiming a less than significant impact without conducting a quantified
construction or operational HRA for nearby, existing sensitive receptors, SWAPE found that the
DEIR fails to compare the excess health risk impact to the SCAQMD’s specific numeric
threshold of 10 in one million. (Ex. B, pp. 6-7.) Thus, in accordance with the most relevant
guidance, an assessment of the health risk posed to nearby existing receptors from Project
construction and operation should have been conducted. Thus, a RDEIR is required to
adequately address and mitigate the health risk impacts of the Project’s construction-related and
operational activities.
3. The EIR fails to adequately evaluate greenhouse gas impacts from the
Project.
The DEIR estimates that the Project would generate net annual GHG emissions of 2,410
metric tons of CO2 equivalents per year (“MT CO2e/year”), which would not exceed the
SCAQMD threshold of 10,000 MT CO2e/year. (Ex. B, p. 7; see also DEIR, pp. 4-75, Table
4.51.) Further, the DEIR relies on the Project’s consistency with the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Sustainable Community Action Plan, CARB’s 2017 Scoping Plan, and Connect SoCal 2020-
2045 RTP/SCS in order to conclude that the Project would result in a less-than-significant GHG
impact. (Ex. B, p. 7; see also, DEIR, pp. 4-77–4-81.) However, SWAPE states that the DEIR’s
GHG analysis and subsequent less-than-significant impact conclusion is incorrect for several
reasons. (Ex. B, pp. 7-10.)
First, the DEIR estimates that the Project would generate net annual GHG emissions of
2,410 MT CO2e/year but the DEIR’s quantitative GHG analysis should not be relied upon since
it relies on an unsubstantiated air model, as discussed above. (Ex. B, pp. 7-8.)
Page 319
Comment re: Jersey Industrial Complex Project EIR
February 8, 2022
Page 11 of 11
Second, the DEIR fails to consider the performance-based standards underlying CARB’s
Scoping Plan. (Id., p. 8.)
Third, the DEIR fails to consider the performance-based standards underlying SCAG’s
RTP/SCS. (Id., pp. 8-10.) Based on SWAPE’s quantitative consistency evaluation utilizing these
standards, SWAPE concluded that the DEIR’s GHG significance determination regarding the
Project’s consistency with applicable plans and policies should not be relied upon. (Id., p. 9.)
Thus, a RDEIR needs to be prepared for the Project to provide additional information and
analysis to conclude less than significant GHG impacts.
IV. CONCLUSION
In light of the above comments, SAFER requests that the Planning Commission refrain
from recommending the certification of the EIR in order to allow staff additional time to address
concerns raised herein. Please include this letter in the record of proceedings for this Project.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sincerely,
`
Victoria Yundt
LOZEAU DRURY LLP
Page 320
EXHIBIT A
Page 321
1
Shawn Smallwood, PhD
3108 Finch Street
Davis, CA 95616
Vincent Acuna, Planning Department
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91 8 February 2022
RE: Jersey Industrial Complex Project
Dear Mr. Acuna,
I write to comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) prepared for the
proposed Jersey Industrial Complex Project (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2021),
specifically on its analysis of potential impacts to biological resources. I understand the
project would consist of 143,014 square feet of floor space on 7.39 acres at the northwest
corner of Milliken Avenue and Jersey Boulevard.
My qualifications for preparing expert comments are the following. I hold a Ph.D.
degree in Ecology from University of California at Davis, where I subsequently worked
for four years as a post-graduate researcher in the Department of Agronomy and Range
Sciences. My research has been on animal density and distribution, habitat selection,
habitat restoration, interactions between wildlife and human infrastructure and
activities, conservation of rare and endangered species, and on the ecology of invading
species. I study wildlife mortality caused by wind turbines, electric distribution lines,
agricultural practices, and road traffic. I authored numerous papers on special-status
species issues. I served as Chair of the Conservation Affairs Committee for The Wildlife
Society – Western Section. I am a member of The Wildlife Society and the Raptor
Research Foundation, and I’ve been a part-time lecturer at California State University,
Sacramento. I was Associate Editor of wildlife biology’s premier scientific journal, The
Journal of Wildlife Management, as well as of Biological Conservation, and I was on the
Editorial Board of Environmental Management. I have performed wildlife surveys in
California for thirty-six years, including at many proposed project sites. My CV is
attached.
SITE VISIT
Noriko Smallwood, a wildlife biologist pursuing a Master’s Degree at California State
University Los Angeles, visited the site of the proposed project for nearly 2 hours from
06:26 to 08:16 hours on 16 June 2021 (Photos 1-2). She walked the site’s perimeter,
stopping to scan for wildlife with the use of binoculars. The sky was clear with no wind,
and temperatures ranged 70‒75° F.
Noriko Smallwood certifies that the foregoing and following survey results are true and
accurately reported.
Page 322
2
Ms. Smallwood detected nearly 15 species of vertebrate wildlife during her 110 minutes
at the site (Table 1). She saw mourning doves (Photo 3), a family of coyotes (Photos 4
and 5), house finches and Great Basin fence lizards (Photos 6 and 7), and black phoebe
(Photo 8), among other species. Tracks indicated that coyotes routinely use a hole at the
bottom of the perimeter fence to access the site for foraging, which has been important
for the rearing of their pups. Noriko also evidence of pocket gophers, which are
members of a keystone species that provides habitat for many other vertebrate species
and which serve as prey to raptors, snakes and other carnivorous species. She saw birds
expressing territorial behavior indicative of breeding, and she saw mourning doves
copulating in close proximity to their on-site nest.
Photos 1-2. Site of proposed Jersey Industrial Complex project, next to railroad
tracks (background trees are where coyotes denned). Photos by Noriko Smallwood, 16
June 2021.
Page 323
3
Table 1. Species of wildlife Noriko Smallwood observed during 06:26 to 08:16 hours
on 16 June 2021 at the proposed Project site, where RR = adjacent railroad tracks.
Species Scientific name Status Notes
Botta's pocket gopher Thomomys bottae Soil mounds
Coyote Canis latrans Adults, 3-4 pups by RR
Mourning dove Zenaida macroura nested on ground; mated
Anna's hummingbird Calypte anna offsite near RR
Black phoebe Sayornis nigricans offsite
Cassin's kingbird Tyrannus vociferans offsite
Common raven Corvus corax socializing
American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos offsite
Northern rough-winged
swallow Stelgidopteryx serripennis
near RR
Northern mockingbird Mimus polyglottos offsite; harassed raven
Bushtit Psaltiparus minimus offsite near RR
European starling Sturnus vulgaris Non-native offsite
House finch Carpodacus mexicanus many; socializing, calling
Lesser goldfinch Carduelis psaltria offsite
Great Basin fence lizard
Scelophorus occidentalis
longipes
many
Photo 3. Mourning
dove at the site of the
proposed project, 16
June 2021. Photo by
Noriko Smallwood.
Page 324
4
Photo 4 and 5. Coyote pups, one tracked by its mother, next to the project site, 16
June 2021. Photos by Noriko Smallwood.
Page 325
5
Photos 6 and 7. House finch and Great Basin fence lizard at the project site. Photos
by Noriko Smallwood, 16 June 2021.
Photo 8. Juvenile black phoebe
at the project site, 16 June 2021.
Photo by Noriko Smallwood.
CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The first step in analysis of potential project impacts to biological resources is to
accurately characterize the existing environmental setting, including the species that use
the site, their relative abundances, how they use the site, key ecological relationships,
and known and ongoing threats to those species with special status. A reasonably
accurate characterization of the environmental setting can provide the baseline against
which to analyze project impacts. Methods to achieve this first step should include
surveys of the site for biological resources and reviews of literature, databases and local
experts for documented occurrences of special-status species. In this case, these
essential steps remain incomplete. Herein I provide additional characterization of the
Page 326
6
wildlife community as a component of the current environmental setting, including the
identification of special-status species likely to use the site at one time or another.
A biologist visited the site on May 14, 2020 (ELMT 2020). Unfortunately, ELMT (2020)
did not report when the biologist arrived, how long he stayed, nor what methods he used
while on site. The reporting of the site survey did not include the most basic
information that a wildlife ecologist would need for assessing whether the survey truly
met due diligence standards. A much more rigorous survey and reporting effort is
warranted.
During the site survey, ELMT (2020) detected only 9 species of vertebrate wildlife. As
reported earlier, Noriko Smallwood detected 15 species. The difference in numbers of
species detected could have been due to daily or yearly variation in wildlife use of the
site. Another explanation could be that ELMT surveyed the site very briefly; Noriko’s
data indicate that 9 species would have been detected in a 25-minute survey. A third
explanation could be that ELMT visited the site in the middle of the day when wildlife
are less active. Without better reporting by ELMT, an explanation for the difference in
survey outcomes remains elusive.
However, whereas Noriko detected 6 species that ELMT did not, ELMT detected 4
species that Noriko did not: Western side-blotched lizard, Say’s phoebe, house sparrow,
and desert cottontail. More surveys would add species known to use the site because a
single reconnaissance-level survey typically detects only a fraction of the species that
actually use the site. Insufficient survey effort has been committed to the site.
Noriko’s detection of 15 species of vertebrate wildlife needs to be interpreted within the
context of her survey effort. To matter who performs the survey, the results of a single
survey qualify as an absurdly thin empirical foundation for characterizing the
environmental setting of any given site, including one proposed for a project. A single
survey can serve only as a starting point toward characterization of a site’s wildlife
community. Noriko had only <2 hours available to perform a visual scan survey on 16
June 2021, so there were only so many species she was likely to detect. It would have
been inappropriate of us to have reported that the site supports only 15 species of
wildlife. However, when a reconnaissance-level survey is diligently performed, and
when the outcome is analyzed appropriately and fully reported, the number of species
detected within a given reconnaissance survey effort can inform of the number of
species that likely would have been detected with a larger survey effort during the same
time of year.
By recording when she detected each species, we were able to forecast the number of
species that could have been detected with a longer effort using the same visual scan
method. Figure 1 shows Noriko’s cumulative count of species detected at the site with
increasing time into her survey. Just as we have seen for many other survey efforts, a
nonlinear regression model fit the data very well, explaining 99% of the variation in the
data, and it showed progress towards the inevitable asymptote of the number of species
detectable over a longer time period using the same survey method. In our case, the
model predicted Noriko would have eventually detected 44 species had she continued
Page 327
7
performing morning surveys during mid-June. She actually detected only a third of
what the pattern in her data predicts she could have detected with an expanded effort.
Figure 1. Actual and
predicted relationships
between the number of
vertebrate wildlife species
detected and the elapsed
survey time based on
Noriko Smallwood’s visual
scan survey on 16 June
2021. Note that the
relationships would differ
if the surveys were based
on another method,
another time of day, or
during another season.
Also note that the
cumulative number of
vertebrate species across
all methods, times of day,
and seasons would
increase substantially.
Noriko could have detected many more species than predicted had she also performed
surveys at different times of day to detect diurnal, nocturnal and crepuscular species, or
surveys in different seasons and years to detect migrants and species with multi-annual
cycles of abundance, or surveys of different methods such as se of acoustic detectors or
thermal-imaging for bats, owls, and nocturnally migratory birds, and live-trapping for
small mammals. Her reconnaissance-level survey, performed carefully and analyzed
appropriately, informs us that the site is richer in wildlife than the 15 species detected,
but also that its environmental setting remains insufficiently characterized as
foundation for analysis of impacts to special-status species (more on this later). What
Noriko’s survey does not inform us, and what detection surveys could, is which of the
potentially occurring special-status species actually occur at the site.
To answer the forgoing question, I completed a much larger survey effort across 167 km2
of annual grasslands of the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area, where from 2015
through 2019, I performed 721 1-hour visual-scan surveys, or 721 hours of surveys, at 46
stations. I used binoculars and otherwise the methods were the same as the methods I
use for surveys at proposed project sites. Each of the 46 stations were surveyed much
like a survey is performed at a proposed project site. At each of the 46 survey stations, I
tallied new species detected with each sequential survey at that station, and then related
the cumulative species detected to the hours (number of surveys, as each survey lasted 1
hour) used to accumulate my counts of species detected. I used combined quadratic and
simplex methods of estimation in Statistica to estimate least-squares, best-fit nonlinear
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Y
Actual count of species
Model prediction
r2 = 0.99, loss = 2.8Cumulative number of wildlife species detectedPage 328
8
models of cumulative species detected regressed on hours of survey (number of surveys)
at the station: 𝑅̂=1
1 𝑎⁄+𝑎×(𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑟)𝑐 , where 𝑅̂ represented cumulative species richness
detected. Coefficients of determination of model-fit ranged 0.88 to 1.00, with a mean of
0.97 (95% CI: 0.96, 0.98). I projected the predictions of each model to 10,000 hours to
find predicted asymptotes of wildlife species richness, but I was more interested in
predicted species richness at a survey effort within the data range, thereby minimizing
bias. I averaged the model predictions of species richness at each incremental increase
of number of surveys, i.e., number of hours. The mean model-predicted asymptote of
species richness was 57 after 11,857 hours of visual-scan surveys. On average I detected
9.5 species over the first 1.83 hours of surveys (to match the number of hours Noriko
completed) in the Altamont Pass, which composed 16.67 % of the total predicted species
Noriko would detect with a much larger survey effort. Given the example illustrated in
Figure 2, and assuming the pattern of survey results is robustly represented by Figure 2,
the 15 species Noriko detected after her 1.83 hours of survey at the project site likely
represented 16.67% of the species to be detected after many more visual-scan surveys.
With many more repeat surveys, Noriko would likely detect 15 0.1667⁄=90 species of
vertebrate wildlife at the site. I would perform the same analysis for the ELMT survey
had ELMT reported sufficient details of their survey for me to do so.
Figure 2. Mean (95% CI)
predicted wildlife species
richness, 𝑅̂, as a nonlinear
function of hour-long
survey increments across
46 visual-scan survey
stations across the
Altamont Pass Wind
Resource Area, Alameda
and Contra Costa
Counties, 2015‒2019.
There is no question that a larger survey effort would result in a longer list of species
documented to use the project site, thereby changing our understanding of the current
environmental setting. But still unknown are which species have yet to be detected, how
many of the yet-to-be-detected species are special-status species, and how many are
0 20 40 60 80 100
0
10
20
30
40
50
Cumulative number of surveys (hours)(95% CI)Page 329
9
listed species. The likelihood of detecting special-status species is typically lower than
that of more common species. This difference can be explained by the fact that special-
status species tend to be rarer than common species. Special-status species also tend to
be more cryptic, fossorial, or active during nocturnal periods when reconnaissance
surveys are not performed. Another useful relationship from careful recording of
species detections and subsequent comparative analysis is the probability of detection of
listed species as a function of an increasing number of vertebrate wildlife species
detected (Figure 3). (Note that listed species number fewer than special-status species,
which are inclusive of listed species.) As demonstrated in Figures 1 and 2, the number
of species detected is largely a function of survey effort. Therefore, greater survey effort
increases the likelihood that listed species will be detected (which is the first tenet of
detection surveys for special-status species). Based on the outcomes of 152 previous
surveys that Noriko and I performed at sites of proposed projects, Noriko’s survey effort
at the project site carried a 17% chance of detecting a listed species. Had she continued
her survey effort until she detected all 90 species of vertebrate wildlife predicted by the
pattern of her data, then her odds of detecting a listed species would have risen to nearly
100%. In other words, listed species might very well use the site, but it would take more
survey effort to achieve a reasonable likelihood of detecting listed species. This context
bears on my comments on the DEIR’s analysis of potential project impacts to biological
resources, below. A fair argument can be made for the revise the DEIR to more
rigorously survey the site for wildlife.
Figure 3. Probability
of detecting ≥1
Candidate, Threatened
or Endangered Species
of wildlife listed under
California or federal
Endangered Species
Acts, based on survey
outcomes logit-
regressed on the
number of wildlife
species Noriko
Smallwood and I
detected as expert
witnesses during 152
site visits throughout
California. The vertical
dashed vertical line
represents the number
of species detected by
ELMT (2020), whereas
the solid vertical line
depicts the number
detected by Noriko.
Number of species detectedProbability of detecting Fully Protected, Candidate, Threatened or Endangered Species0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
95% CI
152 site visits
Page 330
10
According to ELMT (2020), “No active nests or birds displaying nesting behavior were
observed during the field investigation.” Noriko, on the other hand, photographed a
juvenile black phoebe (Photo 8), observed mourning doves copulating on the project site
where the doves had a nest, and observed a northern mockingbird defending its
territory against common ravens, one of which also exhibited behaviors typical of
nesting. ELMT’s failure to detect signs of avian nesting is inexplicable, other than the
possibility that ELMT spent very little time to survey the site.
Determinations of absence and low likelihood of occurrence of special-status species
such as burrowing owl lack foundation in both ELMT (2020) and the DEIR. No field
survey methods were implemented for the detection of bats. No detection surveys were
performed for any of the special-status species with potential to occur at the site.
Whereas the DEIR assesses the occurrence likelihoods of only 15 special-status species
of wildlife, sighting records posted to publicly available data bases indicate the
occurrences of 4 times that number in the area (Table 2). Of the 15 species assessed in
the DEIR, 13 (87%) are determined absent from the site, and the other 2 species are
assigned a low likelihood of occurrence. Two of the “absent” species have been reported
on the project site, 1 has been reported adjacent to the project site, and 5 have been seen
nearby. Of all 60 special-status species reported in the area by the data bases, 3 were
reported on site, 1 on adjacent property, 3 very close, and 29 nearby. Ample evidence
exists in support of the likelihood that special -status species of wildlife use the site, and
grossly insufficient evidence exists for dismissing the likelihoods of their use. The DEIR
needs to be revised to appropriately assess the environmental baseline and to analyze
potential project impacts to biological resources.
Some of the species in Table 2 likely use of the site lightly. Double-crested cormorants
and other species likely target the site’s open space for flight paths. Species such as
California gull and turkey vulture gain lift in the thermals generated by open space -- lift
needed to attain suitable glide altitudes for long-distance travel. California gulls and
other species also need open space for staging and stopover on their ways to roost sites,
foraging, or long-distance migration. Ferruginous hawk and merlin need these spaces
for foraging during winter migration. Even for species that lightly use the site, the DEIR
needs to be revised to appropriately analyze potential project impacts to wildlife.
The DEIR (page 4-39) asserts that “the presence/absence of burrowing owl would be
determined during the preconstruction survey.” This assertion is misleading because
preconstruction surveys are not performed for the purpose of determining presence or
absence or a species. Preconstruction surveys are performed solely for the purpose of
avoiding take of plants or animals that are readily detectable and collectable just prior to
construction grading. To determine presence or absence of a species, detection surveys
designed for this purpose must be implemented. In the case of burrowing owl, the
CDFW (2012) survey protocol would need to be implemented. A preconstruction survey
cannot serve as a surrogate or substitute for detection surveys, and City of Rancho
Cucamonga should not characterize them as such.
The current environmental setting needs to be accurately characterized in a revised
DEIR so that an appropriate impacts analysis can be completed.
Page 331
11
Table 2. Occurrence likelihoods of special-status species of vertebrate wildlife as determined by the DEIR and by
publicly available data bases such as eBird (https://eBird.org) and iNaturalist, where ‘adjacent’ indiccates the adjacent
property to the project site, ‘very close’ indicates within a mile, ‘nearby’ indicates within a few miles, and ‘in region’
indicates within 10 to 30 miles of the project site.
Common name
Species name
Status1
Occurrence likelihood
DEIR Data bases
Double-crested cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus WL Nearby
California gull Larus californicus WL Absent Nearby
Turkey vulture Cathartes aura BOP Nearby
Golden eagle Aquila chrysaetos BGEPA, BCC, CFP Nearby
Swainson’s hawk Buteo swainsoni CT, BOP Very close
Red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis BOP On site
Ferruginous hawk Buteo regalis WL, BOP Very close
Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus BOP Very close
Northern harrier Circus cyaneus SSC3, BOP Absent On site
White-tailed kite Elanus leucurus CFP, BOP Absent Nearby
Sharp-shinned hawk Accipiter striatus WL, BOP Nearby
Cooper’s hawk Accipiter cooperi WL, BOP Low Nearby
American kestrel Falco sparverius BOP Nearby
Merlin Falco columbarius WL, BOP Nearby
Prairie falcon Falco mexicanus WL, BOP Nearby
Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus CE, CFP, BOP Nearby
Barn owl Tyto alba BOP Nearby
Burrowing owl Bubo virginianus BCC, SSC2, BOP Absent Nearby
Great-horned owl Athene cunicularia SSC2, BOP Nearby
Western screech-owl Megascops kennicottii BOP Nearby
Vaux’s swift Chaetura vauxi SSC2 Nearby
Lewis’s woodpecker Melanerpes lewis BCC In region
Nuttall’s woodpecker Picoides nuttallii BCC Nearby
Costa’s hummingbird Calypte costae BCC Absent Adjacent
Allen’s hummingbird Selasphorus sasin BCC Nearby
Cactus wren Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus BCC In region
Horned lark Eremophila alpestris actia WL Low Nearby
Page 332
12
Common name
Species name
Status1
Occurrence likelihood
DEIR Data bases
California gnatcatcher Polioptila c. californica FT, SSC Absent In region
Willow flycatcher Empidonax traillii CE, BCC Nearby
Olive-sided flycatcher Contopus cooperi SSC2 In region
Vermilion flycatcher Pyrocephalus rubinus SSC2 Nearby
Purple martin Progne subis SSC2 In region
Oak titmouse Baeolophus inornatus BCC Nearby
Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus BCC, SSC2 Absent On site
Least Bell’s vireo Vireo belli pusillus FE, CE Absent Nearby
Yellow warbler Setophaga petechia SSC2 Nearby
Yellow-breasted chat Icteria virens SSC3 Nearby
Summer tanager Piranga rubra SSC1 In region
Black-chinned sparrow Spizella atrogularis BCC In region
Bell’s sage sparrow Amphispiza b. belli WL In region
Oregon vesper sparrow Pooecetes gramineus affinis SSC2 Nearby
Grasshopper sparrow Ammodramus savannarum SSC2 In range
Southern California rufous-crowned sparrow Aimophila ruficeps canescens BCC, WL Absent In region
Tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor SSC1 Absent In region
Yellow-headed blackbird Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus SSC3 In region
Lawrence’s goldfinch Spinus lawrencei BCC Nearby
Blainville’s horned lizard Phrynosoma blainvillii SSC Absent Nearby
Pallid bat Antrozous pallidus SSC, WBWG H In range
Townsend’s western big-eared bat Plecotus t. townsendii SSC, WBWG H In region
Western red bat Lasiurus blossevillii SSC, WBWG H In region
Western yellow bat Lasiurus xanthinus SSC, WBWG H Absent In range
Small-footed myotis Myotis cililabrum WBWG M In range
Miller’s myotis Myotis evotis WBWG M In region
Fringed myotis Myotis thysanodes WBWG H In region
Long-legged myotis Myotis Volans WBWG H In range
Yuma myotis Myotis yumanensis SSC, WBWG LM In region
Western mastiff bat Eumops perotis SSC Absent In region
Page 333
13
Common name
Species name
Status1
Occurrence likelihood
DEIR Data bases
Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus WBWG LM In region
American badger Taxidea taxus SSC Nearby
1 Listed as FT and FE = federal threatened and endangered, BCC = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bird of Conservation
Concern, CT and CE = California threatened and endangered, CFP = California Fully Protected (CDFW Code 3511), BOP =
California Fish and Game Code 3503.5 (Birds of prey), and SSC1, SSC2 and SSC3 = California Bird Species of Special
Concern priorities 1, 2 and 3, respectively (Shuford and Gardali 2008), WL = Taxa to Watch List (Shuford and Gardali
2008), and WBWG = Western Bat Working Group listing as moderate or high priority.
Page 334
14
BIOLOGICAL IMPACTS ASSESSMENT
Determination of occurrence likelihoods of special-status species is not, in and of itself,
an analysis of potential project impacts. An impacts analysis should consider whether
and how a proposed project would affect members of a species, larger demographic
units of the species, or the whole of a species. In the following, I analyze several types of
impacts likely to result from the project, and almost none of which are analyzed in the
DEIR.
Habitat Loss
The DEIR claims that, other than for killdeer which nest on the ground, nesting
potential exists only in the trees scattered beyond the site’s perimeter. However, the
DEIR mischaracterizes the number of species that nest on the ground. Many bird
species are ground-nesters, including mourning doves at the site. The ELMT (2020)
survey was performed in the appropriate season for detecting nesting birds, but
obvi0usly was not directed towards nesting birds or ELMT would have noticed them.
No serious effort has been directed toward the detection of nesting birds on the site.
A recent study documented a 29% decline in overall bird abundance across North
America over the last 48 years – a decline driven by multiple factors, but principally
attributed to habitat loss and habitat fragmentation (Rosenberg et al. 2019). Habitat
loss not only results in the immediate numerical decline of wildlife, but also in
permanent loss of productive capacity. For example, a grassland/wetland/woodland
complex at one study site had a total bird nesting density of 32.8 nests per acre (Young
1948). In another study on a similar complex of vegetation cover, the average annual
nest density was 35.8 nests per acre (Yahner 1982). These densities averaged 34.3 nests
per acre, indicative of a very large productive capacity of North American birds, but also
indicative of a very large source of lost capacity should habitat be taken for human uses.
Assuming nesting density at the project site is a fifth of the average reported by Young
(1948) and Yahner (1982), then 6.8 bird nests per acre multiplied against the project’s
7.39 acres would predict that 50 bird nests produce new birds at the site annually. The
average number of fledglings per nest in Young’s (1948) study was 2.9. Assuming
Young’s (1948) study site typifies bird productivity, the project would prevent the
production of 145 fledglings per year. After 100 years and further assuming an average
bird generation time of 5 years, the lost capacity of both breeders and annual fledgling
production would total 16,500 birds {(nests/year × chicks/nest × number of years) + (2
adults/nest × nests/year) × (number of years ÷ years/generation)}. The project’s
denial to California of 16,500 birds over the first century following
construction would easily qualify as a significant and substantial impact.
This impact has not been addressed by City of Rancho Cucamonga. The DEIR should be
revised to appropriately analyze the project’s impacts from habitat loss.
Habitat fragmentation, which is the reduction of connectivity of remaining habitat
patches on a landscape, can further diminish the productive capacity of a site
(Smallwood 2015). Habitat fragmentation has progressed rapidly around the project
Page 335
15
site, leaving a diminishing number of patches of open space in the area, each of which is
increasingly critical to the continued existence of many wildlife species. Habitat
fragmentation is one of the cumulative effects of this project that needs to be analyzed in
a revised DEIR.
Wildlife Movement
According to ELMT (2020:6) and the DEIR (page 5-7), “As a result, implementation of
the proposed project will not disrupt or have any adverse effects on any migratory
corridors or linkages in the surrounding area.” The DEIR dismisses potential impacts to
wildlife movement by concluding that development around the project site precludes its
use as part of a wildlife movement corridor. The premise of this conclusion must be that
the presence of a wildlife corridor determines whether a project would significantly
interfere with wildlife movement in the region. However, this premise represents a false
CEQA standard. The primary phrase of the CEQA standard goes to wildlife movement
regardless of whether the movement is channeled by a corridor. A site such as the
proposed project site is critically important for wildlife movement because it composes
an increasingly diminishing patch of open space within a growing expanse of
anthropogenic uses, forcing more species of birds to use the site for stopover and staging
during migration, dispersal, and home range patrol (Warnock 2010, Taylor et al. 2011,
Runge et al. 2014). The project would cut birds and bats off from stopover, roosting and
staging, forcing them to travel even farther between remaining stopover areas along
migration routes. The project would interfere with wildlife movement in the region.
The DEIR needs to be revised to address the project’s impacts on wildlife movement in
the region.
Traffic Impacts on Wildlife
According to Mizuta Traffic Consulting (MTC 2020), the project would generate an
average daily trip (ADT) rate of 182 passenger cars and 96 trucks. However, neither
MTC (2020, 2021) nor the DEIR report any prediction of vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
Thus, the DEIR provides only a weak basis for estimating the possible extent of project
impacts to wildlife along roads. To point out the potential magnitude of an important
project impact that the DEIR fails to address, and which ought to be addressed in a
revised EIR, I assume 20 miles per car trip and 150 miles per truck trip to predict
annual VMT of 1,328,600 for passenger cars and 5,256,000 for shipping trucks and a
total 6,584,600. Assuming these VMT predictions are reasonably close to accurate, then
the basis exists for predicting one of the most important potential project impacts to
wildlife.
Vehicle collisions have accounted for the deaths of many thousands of amphibian,
reptile, mammal, bird, and arthropod fauna, and the impacts have often been found to
be significant at the population level (Forman et al. 2003). Across North America,
traffic impacts have taken devastating tolls on wildlife (Forman et al. 2003). In Canada,
3,562 birds were estimated killed per 100 km of road per year (Bishop and Brogan
2013), and the US estimate of avian mortality on roads is 2,200 to 8,405 deaths per 100
Page 336
16
km per year, or 89 million to 340 million total per year (Loss et al. 2014). Local or
regional impacts can be more intense than at the national level.
In a recent study of traffic-caused wildlife mortality, investigators found 1,275 carcasses
of 49 species of mammals, birds, amphibians and reptiles over 15 months of searches
along a 2.5 mile stretch of Vasco Road in Contra Costa County, California (Mendelsohn
et al. 2009). Using carcass detection trials performed on land immediately adjacent to
the traffic mortality study (Brown et al. 2016) to adjust the found fatalities for the
proportion of fatalities not found due to scavenger removal and searcher error, the
estimated traffic-caused fatalities was 12,187. This fatality estimate translates to a rate
of 3,900 wild animals per mile per year killed. In terms comparable to the national
estimates, the estimates from the Mendelsohn et al. (2009) study would translate to
243,740 animals killed per 100 km of road per year, or 29 times that of Loss et al.’s
(2014) upper bound estimate and 68 times the Canadian estimate. An analysis is
needed of whether increased traffic generated by the project site would similarly result
in local impacts on wildlife.
Increased use of existing roads would increase wildlife fatalities (see Figure 7 in
Kobylarz 2001). It is possible that project-related traffic impacts would far exceed the
impacts of land conversion to use for a warehouse. Wildlife roadkill is not randomly
distributed, and so it can be predicted. Causal factors include types of roadway, human
population density, and temperature (Chen and Wu 2014), as well as time of day and
adjacency and extent of vegetation cover (Chen and Wu 2014, Bartonička et al. 2018),
and intersections with streams and riparian vegetation (Bartonička et al. 2018). For
example, species of mammalian Carnivora are killed by vehicle traffic within 0.1 miles of
stream crossings >40 times other than expected (K. S. Smallwood, 1989-2018
unpublished data). Reptiles are killed on roads where roadside fences end or where
fences are damaged (Markle et al. 2017). There has even been a function developed to
predict the number of golden eagles killed along the road, where the function includes
traffic volume and density of road-killed animals available for eagles to scavenge upon
(Lonsdorf et al. 2018). These factors also point the way toward mitigation measures,
which should be formulated in a revised DEIR.
Predicting project-generated traffic impacts to wildlife
Based on my assumptions of VMT applied to the DEIR’s predicted ADT, I predict the
project would generate 6,584,600 vehicle miles traveled annually. This is a lot of
mileage to be driven at great peril to wildlife that must cross roads to go about their
business of foraging, patrolling home ranges, dispersing and migrating (Photos 9 and
10). Despite the obvious risk to wildlife, and despite the multiple papers and books
written about this type of impact and how to mitigate them, the DEIR does not address
impacts to wildlife caused by vehicles traveling to and from the project site.
Page 337
17
Photo 9. A Gambel’s quail dashes
across a road on 3 April 2021.
Such road crossings are usually
successful, but too often prove fatal
to the animal. Photo by Noriko
Smallwood.
Photo 10. A mourning
dove killed by vehicle traffic
on a California road. Photo
by Noriko Smallwood, 21
June 2020.
For wildlife vulnerable to front-end collisions and crushing under tires, road mortality
can be predicted from the study of Mendelsohn et al. (2009) as a basis, although it
would be helpful to have the availability of more studies like that of Mendelsohn et al.
(2009) at additional locations. My analysis of the Mendelsohn et al. (2009) data
resulted in an estimated 3,900 animals killed per mile along a county road in Contra
Costa County. Two percent of the estimated number of fatalities were birds, and the
balance was composed of 34% mammals (many mice and pocket mice, but also ground
squirrels, desert cottontails, striped skunks, American badgers, raccoons, and others),
52.3% amphibians (large numbers of California tiger salamanders and California red -
legged frogs, but also Sierran treefrogs, western toads, arboreal salamanders, slender
salamanders and others), and 11.7% reptiles (many western fence lizards, but also
skinks, alligator lizards, and snakes of various species).
During the Mendelsohn et al. (2009) study, 19,500 cars traveled Vasco Road daily, so
the vehicle miles that contributed to my estimate of wildlife fatalities was 19,500 cars
and trucks × 2.5 miles × 365 days/year × 1.25 years = 22,242,187.5 vehicle miles per
12,187 wildlife fatalities, or 1,825 vehicle miles per fatality. I predict the project would
Page 338
18
generate 6,584,600vehicle miles per year, which divided by the 1,825 miles per fatality,
would predict 3,608 wildlife fatalities per year. Operations over 50 years would
accumulate 180,400 wildlife fatalities. It remains unknown whether and to what
degree vehicle tires contribute to carcass removals from the roadway, thereby
contributing a negative bias to the fatality estimates I made from the Mendelsohn et al.
(2009) fatality counts. The Project’s toll on wildlife could be even higher than I predict.
The DEIR does not address this impact in the least.
Based on my assumptions and simple calculations, the project-generated traffic would
cause substantial, significant impacts to wildlife. The DEIR needs to be revised to
analyze this impact. Mitigation measures to improve wildlife safety along roads are
available and are feasible, and they need exploration for their suitability with the
proposed project.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The DEIR provides no analysis of cumulative impacts to biological resources other than
to imply that cumulative impacts are really just residual impacts of incomplete
mitigation of project-level impacts. If that was CEQA’s standard, then cumulative
effects analysis would be merely an analysis of mitigation efficacy. And if that was the
standard, then I must point out that none of the project-level impacts would be offset to
any degree by the proposed preconstruction surveys to be performed for nesting birds.
But the DEIR’s implied standard is not the standard of analysis of cumulative effects.
CEQA defines cumulative impacts, and it outlines two general approaches for
performing the analysis. The DEIR needs to be revised, and it needs to include an
appropriate, serious analysis of cumulative impacts.
When it comes to wildlife, cumulative effects can often be interpreted as effects on the
numerical capacity (Smallwood 2015), breeding success, genetic diversity, or other
population performance metrics expressed at the regional scale. In the case of migrating
birds, the project’s cumulative effects could be measured as numerical reductions of
breeding birds at far-off breeding sites as migrating adults and next-year’s recruits lose
access to stop-over habitat. In the cases of wildlife species that are susceptible to traffic
collisions, the project’s contribution to ongoing and foreseeable traffic-caused mortality
can be measured or predicted. Even crude predictions of cumulative impacts are
imperative. The DEIR needs to be revised to adequately address the project’s potential
contributions to cumulative impacts on wildlife in the region.
MITIGATION
BIO-1: Preconstruction survey for breeding birds
Preconstruction surveys should be performed, but not as substitute for detection
surveys. Preconstruction surveys are not designed or intended to reduce project
impacts, let alone to reduce impacts to less than significant levels; they are not even
designed to assess impacts. Preconstruction surveys are only intended as last-minute,
one-time salvage and rescue operations targeting readily detectable nests or individuals
Page 339
19
before they are crushed under heavy construction machinery. Because most special-
status species are rare and cryptic, and because most species are expert at hiding their
nests lest they get predated, most of them will not be detected by preconstruction
surveys.
Detection surveys are needed to inform preconstruction take-avoidance surveys by
mapping out where biologists performing preconstruction surveys are most likely to find
animals before the tractor blade finds them. Detection surveys were designed by species
experts, often undergoing considerable deliberation and review before adoption.
Detection surveys often require repeated efforts using methods known to maximize
likelihoods of detection. Detection surveys are needed to assess impacts and to inform
the formulation of appropriate mitigation measures, because preconstruction surveys
are not intended for these roles either. What is missing from the DEIR, and what is in
greater need than preconstruction surveys, are detection surveys consistent with
guidelines and protocols that wildlife ecologists have uniquely developed for use with
each special-status species. What is also missing is compensatory mitigation of
unavoidable impacts.
Following detection surveys, preconstruction surveys should be performed. However,
the DEIR should be revised, and it should detail how the results of preconstruction
surveys will be reported. Without reporting the results, preconstruction surveys are
vulnerable to serving as an empty gesture rather than a mitigation measure. For these
reasons, this mitigation measure is insufficient to reduce the project’s impacts to nesting
birds to less than significant.
RECOMMENDED MEASURES
Detection Surveys
Detection surveys are needed for each of the special-status species in Table 2. Detection
surveys are needed for nesting birds and for bats. For bats, I recommend deployment of
acoustic detectors and use of thermal-imaging. For birds, I recommend a nest survey,
including the mapping of nest sites of each species. Breeding-season burrowing owl
surveys need to be implemented, but they should be implemented prior to the
circulation of a revised DEIR to more appropriately address potential impacts to
burrowing owls and mitigation of those impacts.
Habitat Loss and Wildlife Movement
The DEIR provides no mitigation for adverse impacts from habitat loss or to regional
movement of wildlife. At a minimum, substantial compensatory mitigation is needed in
response to the project’s impacts from habitat loss and interference with wildlife
movement, including impacts to birds and bats using the site as stop-over or staging
during migration. The proposed project site composes one of the last patches of open
space available to birds and bats on long-distance dispersal or migration flights.
Page 340
20
Road Mortality
Compensatory mitigation is needed for the increased wildlife mortality that will be
caused by the project’s contribution to increased road traffic in the region. I suggest
that this mitigation can be directed toward funding research to identify fatality patterns
and effective impact reduction measures. Compensatory mitigation can also be
provided in the form of donations to wildlife rehabilitation facilities (see below).
Fund Wildlife Rehabilitation Facilities
Compensatory mitigation ought also to include funding contributions to wildlife
rehabilitation facilities to cover the costs of injured animals that will be delivered to
these facilities for care. Most of the injuries will likely be caused by the increased trip
generation of cars and trucks. Many animals need treatment caused by collision injuries
and an increasing number appear to be injured by the turbulence of passing trucks.
Thank you for your attention,
______________________
Shawn Smallwood, Ph.D.
REFERENCES CITED
Bartonička, T., R. Andrášik, M. Dula, J. Sedoník, and M. Bíl. 2018. Identification of
local factors causing clustering of animal-vehicle collisions. Journal of Wildlife
Management. Journal of Wildlife Management DOI: 10.1002/jwmg.21467
Bishop, C. A. and J. M. Brogan. 2013. Estimates of Avian Mortality Attributed to
Vehicle Collisions in Canada. Avian Conservation and Ecology 8:2.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ACE-00604-080202.
Brown, K., K. S. Smallwood, J. Szewczak, and B. Karas. 2016. Final 2012-2015 Report
Avian and Bat Monitoring Project Vasco Winds, LLC. Prepared for NextEra Energy
Resources, Livermore, California.
CDFW (California Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing
Owl Mitigation. Sacramento, California.
Chen, X. and S. Wu. 2014. Examining patterns of animal–vehicle collisions in
Alabama, USA. Human-Wildlife Interactions 8:235-244.
City of Rancho Cucamonga. 2021. Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Jersey
Industrial Complex Project, SCH: 2021060608. Prepared by Birdseye Planning
Group, LLC. Rancho Cucamonga, California.
Page 341
21
ELMT. 2020. Habitat assessment for the proposed Jersey Industrial Complex Project
located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California.
Prepared for Birdseye Planning Group, LLC, Vista, California.
Forman, T. T., D. Sperling, J. A. Bisonette, A. P. Clevenger, C. D. Cutshall, V. H. Dale, L.
Fahrig, R. France, C. R. Goldman, K. Heanue, J. A. Jones, F. J. Swanson, T.
Turrentine, and T. C. Winter. 2003. Road Ecology. Island Press, Covello,
California.
Kobylarz, B. 2001. The effect of road type and traffic intensity on amphibian road
mortality. Journal of Service Learning in Conservation Biology 1:10-15.
Lonsdorf, E. C. A. Sanders-Reed, C. Boal, and T. D. Allison. 2018. Modeling golden
eagle-vehicle collisions to design mitigation strategies. Journal of Wildlife
Management 82:1633-1644.
Loss, S. R., T. Will, and P. P. Marra. 2014. Estimation of Bird-Vehicle Collision
Mortality on U.S. Roads. Journal of Wildlife Management 78:763-771.
Markle, C. E., S. D. Gillingwater, R. Levick, P. Chow-Fraser. 2017. The true cost of
partial fencing: evaluating strategies to reduce reptile road mortality. Wildlife
Society Bulletin 41:342-350.
Mendelsohn, M., W. Dexter, E. Olson, and S. Weber. 2009. Vasco Road wildlife
movement study report. Report to Contra Costa County Public Works Department,
Martinez, California.
MTC (Mizuta Traffic Consulting). 2020. Revised Trip Generation and VMT Assessment
for the Jersey Industrial Complex Project. Report to Birdseye Planning Group, Vista,
California.
Rosenberg, K. V., A. M. Dokter, P. J. Blancher, J. R. Sauer, A. C. Smith, P. A. Smith, J. C.
Stanton, A. Panjabi , L. Helft , M. Parr, and P. P. Marra. 2019. Decline of the North
American avifauna. Science 10.1126/science.aaw1313 (2019).
Runge, C. A., T. G. Martin, H. P. Possingham, S. G. Willis, and R. A. Fuller. 2014.
Conserving mobile species. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment 12(7): 395–402,
doi:10.1890/130237.
Shuford, W. D., and T. Gardali, [eds.]. 2008. California bird species of special concern: a
ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of
immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western
Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California.
Smallwood, K. S. 2015. Habitat fragmentation and corridors. Pages 84-101 in M. L.
Morrison and H. A. Mathewson, Eds., Wildlife habitat conservation: concepts,
Page 342
22
challenges, and solutions. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland,
USA.
Taylor, P. D., S. A. Mackenzie, B. G. Thurber, A. M. Calvert, A. M. Mills, L. P. McGuire,
and C. G. Guglielmo. 2011. Landscape movements of migratory birds and bats reveal
an expanded scale of stopover. PlosOne 6(11): e27054.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0027054.
Warnock, N. 2010. Stopping vs. staging: the difference between a hop and a jump.
Journal of Avian Biology 41:621-626.
Yahner, R. H. 1982. Avian nest densities and nest-site selection in farmstead
shelterbelts. The Wilson Bulletin 94:156-175.
Young, H. 1948. A comparative study of nesting birds in a five-acre park. The Wilson
Bulletin 61:36-47.
Page 343
EXHIBIT B
Page 344
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949) 887-9013
mhagemann@swape.com
Paul E. Rosenfeld, PhD
(310) 795-2335
prosenfeld@swape.com
February 8, 2022
Victoria A. Yundt
Lozeau | Drury LLP
1939 Harrison Street, Suite 150
Oakland, CA 94612
Subject: Comments on the Jersey Industrial Complex Project (SCH No. 2021060608)
Dear Ms. Yundt,
We have reviewed the November 2021 Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR”) for the Jersey
Industrial Complex Project (“Project”) located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“City”). The Project
proposes to construct a 159,580-SF building, including 143,014-SF of warehouse space, 8,127-SF of
mezzanine storage space, 8,127-SF of office space, and a 312-SF electrical room, as well as 91 parking
spaces, on the 7.39-acre site.
Our review concludes that the DEIR fails to adequately evaluate the Project’s air quality, health risk, and
greenhouse gas impacts. As a result, emissions and health risk impacts associated with construction and
operation of the proposed Project are underestimated and inadequately addressed. An updated EIR
should be prepared to adequately assess and mitigate the potential air quality, health risk, and
greenhouse gas impacts that the project may have on the surrounding environment.
Air Quality Unsubstantiated Input Parameters Used to Estimate Project Emissions
The DEIR’s air quality analysis relies on emissions calculated with CalEEMod.2020.4.0 (p. 4-14).1
CalEEMod provides recommended default values based on site-specific information, such as land use
type, meteorological data, total lot acreage, project type and typical equipment associated with project
type. If more specific project information is known, the user can change the default values and input
project-specific values, but the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) requires that such changes
1 CAPCOA (November 2017) CalEEMod User’s Guide, http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/01_user-39-s-guide2016-3-2_15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4.
Page 345
2
be justified by substantial evidence. Once all of the values are inputted into the model, the Project's
construction and operational emissions are calculated, and "output files" are generated. These output
files disclose to the reader what parameters are utilized in calculating the Project's air pollutant
emissions and make known which default values are changed as well as provide justification for the
values selected.
When reviewing the Project’s CalEEMod output files, provided in the Air Quality Report (“AQ Report”) as
Appendix B to the DEIR, we found that several model inputs were not consistent with information
disclosed in the DEIR. As a result, the Project’s construction and operational emissions are
underestimated. As a result, an updated EIR should be prepared to include an updated air quality
analysis that adequately evaluates the impacts that construction and operation of the Project will have
on local and regional air quality.
Failure to Model All Proposed Land Uses
Regarding the Project’s proposed land uses, the DEIR provides the following table (see excerpt below)
(p. 3-6):
As demonstrated above, the model should have included 8,127-SF of office space in addition to 151,455-
SF of warehouse space.2 However, review of the CalEEMod output files demonstrates that the “Jersey
Industrial Complex LDV” and “Jersey Industrial Complex HDV” models include all 159,580-SF as
“Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail” (see excerpt below) (Appendix B, pp. 58, 86, 115, 148).
As you can see in the excerpt above, the model fails to distinguish between the warehouse and office
land uses. This inconsistency presents an issue, as CalEEMod includes 63 different land use types that
are each assigned a distinctive set of energy usage emission factors.3 Furthermore, each land use type
2 Calculated: 143,014-SF warehouse space + 8,127-SF mezzanine storage + 314 electrical room = 151,455-SF total
warehouse space.
3 “CalEEMod User’s Guide, Appendix D.” CAPCOA, September 2016, available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/upgrades/2016.3/05_appendix-d2016-3-1.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
Page 346
3
includes a specific trip rate that CalEEMod uses to calculate mobile-source emissions.4 Thus, by failing to
include all proposed land use types, the model may underestimate the Project’s construction-related
and operational emissions and should not be relied upon to determine Project significance.
Incorrect Application of Area-Related Operational Mitigation Measures
Review of the CalEEMod output files demonstrates that the “Jersey Industrial Complex LDV” and “Jersey
Industrial Complex HDV” models include the following area-related operational mitigation measures
(see excerpt below) (Appendix B, pp. 82, 111, 140, 174).
Furthermore, the models include the following area-related operational mitigation measure associated
with parking (Appendix B, pp. 59, 87, 116, 149):
As previously mentioned, the CalEEMod User’s Guide requires any changes to model defaults be
justified.5 However the “User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data” table fails to provide a
justification for the above changes. Furthermore, regarding the use of low VOC paint, the DEIR states:
“In addition to SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements, emissions modeling also accounts for the use of
low-VOC paint (50 grams/Liter (g/L) for non-flat coatings and 100 g/L for pavement coatings) as
required by SCAQMD Rule 1113” (p. 4-22).
However, these justifications are insufficient for three reasons.
First, the inclusion of the operational mitigation measures, based on the Project’s purported compliance
with SCAQMD Rule 1113, is unsupported. As previously stated, according to the AEP CEQA Portal Topic
Paper on mitigation measures:
“By definition, mitigation measures are not part of the original project design. Rather, mitigation
measures are actions taken by the lead agency to reduce impacts to the environment resulting
from the original project design. Mitigation measures are identified by the lead agency after the
4 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, May 2021, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/caleemod/user-guide-2021/01_user-39-s-guide2020-4-0.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 29.
5 CalEEMod User Guide, available at: http://www.caleemod.com/, p. 2, 9
Page 347
4
project has undergone environmental review and are above-and-beyond existing laws,
regulations, and requirements that would reduce environmental impacts.”6
As you can see in the excerpt above, mitigation measures “are not part of the original project design”
and are intended to go “above-and-beyond” existing regulatory requirements. As such, the inclusion of
these measures, based on the Project’s compliance with SCAQMD Rule 1113, is unsubstantiated.
Second, the DEIR fails to formally include the above-mentioned design features as formal mitigation
measures. This is incorrect, as AEP guidance states:
“While not “mitigation”, a good practice is to include those project design feature(s) that
address environmental impacts in the mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP).
Often the MMRP is all that accompanies building and construction plans through the permit
process. If the design features are not listed as important to addressing an environmental
impact, it is easy for someone not involved in the original environmental process to approve a
change to the project that could eliminate one or more of the design features without
understanding the resulting environmental impact” (emphasis added).7
As you can see in the excerpt above, design features that are not formally included as mitigation
measures in a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) may be eliminated from the
Project’s design altogether. Thus, as the above-mentioned area-related operational measures are not
formally included as mitigation measures, we cannot guarantee that they would be implemented,
monitored, and enforced on the Project site.
Third, we cannot verify the area-related operational mitigation measures based on SCAQMD Rule 1113
alone. The SCAQMD Rule 1113 Table of Standards provides the required VOC limits (grams of VOC per
liter of coating) for 57 different coating categories (e.g., Floor coatings, Faux Finishing Coatings, Fire-
Proofing Coatings, Cement Coatings, Multi-Color Coatings, Primers, Sealers, Recycled Coatings, Shellac,
Stains, Traffic Coatings, Waterproofing Sealers, Wood Coatings, etc.).8 The VOC limits for each coating
varies from a minimum value of 50 g/L to a maximum value of 730 g/L. As such, we cannot verify that
SCAQMD Rule 1113 substantiates a reduction to the default coating values without more information
regarding what category of coating will be used. As the DEIR and associated documents fail explicitly
require the Project use non-flat and pavement coatings, we are unable to verify the use of low VOC
paint would actually be implemented, monitored, and enforced on the Project site.
As a result, the inclusion of the above-mentioned area-related operational mitigation measures in the
model is incorrect. By including several mitigation measures without properly committing to their
6 “CEQA Portal Topic Paper Mitigation Measures.” AEP, February 2020, available at:
https://ceqaportal.org/tp/CEQA%20Mitigation%202020.pdf, p. 5.
7 “CEQA Portal Topic Paper Mitigation Measures.” AEP, February 2020, available at:
https://ceqaportal.org/tp/CEQA%20Mitigation%202020.pdf, p. 6.
8 SCAQMD Rule 1113 Advisory Notice.” SCAQMD, February 2016, available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/rule-book/reg-xi/r1113.pdf?sfvrsn=24, p. 1113-14, Table of Standards
1.
Page 348
5
implementation, the model may underestimate the Project’s operational emissions and should not be
relied upon to determine Project significance. Diesel Particulate Matter Health Risk Emissions Inadequately Evaluated
The DEIR concludes that the Project would have a less-than-significant health risk impact without
conducting a quantified construction or operational health risk analysis (“HRA”) (p. 4-22 – 4-23).
Regarding the health risk impacts associated with Project construction, the DEIR states:
“The greatest potential for toxic air contaminant emissions would be related to diesel
particulate emissions associated with heavy equipment operations during construction of the
proposed project and truck traffic. According to SCAQMD methodology, health effects from
carcinogenic air toxics are usually described in terms of “individual cancer risk”. “Individual
Cancer Risk” is the likelihood that a person exposed to concentrations of toxic air contaminants
over a 70-year lifetime will contract cancer, based on the use of standard risk-assessment
methodology. Given the short-term construction schedule, the proposed project would not
result in a long-term (i.e., 70 years) substantial source of toxic air contaminant emissions and
related individual cancer risk. Therefore, no significant short-term toxic air contaminant impacts
would occur during construction of the proposed project” (p. 4-22 – 4-23).
As demonstrated above, the DEIR concludes that the Project would result in a less-than-significant
construction-related health risk impact because the short-term construction duration would not result
in substantial toxic air contaminant (“TAC”) emissions. Furthermore, regarding the health risk impacts
associated with Project operation, the DEIR states:
“While truck operation would generate DPM, the site is located along an unrestricted truck
route (Milliken Avenue) within the City of Rancho Cucamonga per Section 10.56.010 of the
Municipal Code. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) Air Quality and Land Use Handbook
(2005) recommends avoiding the siting of new sensitive receptors within 500 feet of an urban
roadway with 100,000 vehicles daily. Traffic counts from 2015 show daily volumes on Milliken
Avenue in proximity to Jersey Boulevard are 30,310. If these volumes are factored up by 2%
annually, the 2021 volumes would be approximately 34,134. This is less than the recommended
threshold. The project is not a sensitive use and project traffic would utilize an existing truck
route. The nearest receptor is located approximately one-half mile south of the site along
Milliken Avenue and daily volumes are less than the CARB recommended threshold. Thus,
project-related truck traffic would not pose a health risk or justify further evaluation in a health
risk assessment” (p. 4-23 – 4-24).
As demonstrated above, the DEIR concludes that the Project would result in a less-than-significant
operational health risk impact because the nearest sensitive receptor is located a half mile from the
Project site and the traffic volumes along Milliken Avenue are less than the CARB recommended
threshold. However, the DEIR’s evaluation of the Project’s potential health risk impacts, as well as the
subsequent less-than-significant impact conclusion, is incorrect for three reasons.
Page 349
6
First, by failing to prepare a quantified construction and operational HRA, the Project is inconsistent with
CEQA’s requirement to correlate the increase in emissions that the Project would generate to the
adverse impacts on human health caused by those emissions. 9 This is incorrect, as construction of the
proposed Project would produce diesel particulate matter (“DPM”) emissions through the exhaust
stacks of construction equipment over a potential construction period of approximately 12 months (p. 3-
6). Furthermore, regardless of the DEIR’s claims, the Project would generate truck trips that would
generate additional exhaust emissions and continue to expose nearby sensitive receptors to DPM
emissions during Project operation. However, the DEIR fails to evaluate Project-generated TACs or
indicate the concentrations at which such pollutants would trigger adverse health effects. Thus, without
making a reasonable effort to connect the Project’s construction-related and operational TAC emissions
to the potential health risks posed to nearby receptors, the DEIR is inconsistent with CEQA’s
requirement to correlate the increase in emissions generated by the Project with the potential adverse
impacts on human health.
Second, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (“OEHHA”), the organization responsible
for providing guidance on conducting HRAs in California, released its most recent Risk Assessment
Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments in February 2015.10 This
guidance document describes the types of projects that warrant the preparation of an HRA. The OEHHA
document recommends that all short-term projects lasting at least two months be evaluated for cancer
risks to nearby sensitive receptors. As the Project’s construction duration exceeds the 2-month
requirement set forth by OEHHA, it is clear that the Project meets the threshold warranting a quantified
HRA under OEHHA guidance. Furthermore, the OEHHA document recommends that exposure from
projects lasting more than 6 months be evaluated for the duration of the project and recommends that
an exposure duration of 30 years be used to estimate individual cancer risk for the maximally exposed
individual resident (“MEIR”). Even though we were not provided with the expected lifetime of the
Project, we can reasonably assume that the Project will operate for at least 30 years, if not more.
Therefore, we recommend that health risk impacts from Project operation also be evaluated, as a 30-
year exposure duration vastly exceeds the 6-month requirement set forth by OEHHA. These
recommendations reflect the most recent state health risk policies, and as such, we recommend that an
analysis of health risk impacts posed to nearby sensitive receptors from Project-generated DPM
emissions be included in an updated EIR for the Project.
Third, by claiming a less than significant impact without conducting a quantified construction or
operational HRA for nearby, existing sensitive receptors, the DEIR fails to compare the excess health risk
impact to the SCAQMD’s specific numeric threshold of 10 in one million.11 Thus, in accordance with the
9 “Sierra Club v. County of Fresno.” Supreme Court of California, December 2018, available at:
https://ceqaportal.org/decisions/1907/Sierra%20Club%20v.%20County%20of%20Fresno.pdf.
10 “Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February
2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf.
11 “South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds.” SCAQMD, April 2019, available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-significance-thresholds.pdf.
Page 350
7
most relevant guidance, an assessment of the health risk posed to nearby, existing receptors from
Project construction and operation should have been conducted.
Greenhouse Gas Failure to Adequately Evaluate Greenhouse Gas Impacts
The DEIR estimates that the Project would generate net annual greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions of
2,410 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents per year (“MT CO2e/year”), which would not exceed the
SCAQMD threshold of 10,000 MT CO2e/year (see excerpt below) (p. 4-75, Table 4.5-1).
Furthermore, the DEIR relies upon the Project’s consistency with the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Sustainable Community Action Plan, CARB’s 2017 Scoping Plan, and Connect SoCal 2020-2045 RTP/SCS
in order to conclude that the Project would result in a less-than-significant GHG impact (p. 4-77 – 4-81).
However, the DEIR’s GHG analysis, as well as the subsequent less-than-significant impact conclusion, is
incorrect for three reasons.
(1) The DEIR’s quantitative GHG analysis relies upon an incorrect and unsubstantiated air model;
(2) The DEIR fails to consider the performance-based standards under CARB’s Scoping Plan; and
(3) The DEIR fails to consider the performance-based standards under SCAG’s RTP/SCS.
1) Incorrect and Unsubstantiated Quantitative Analysis of Emissions
As previously stated, the DEIR estimates that the Project would generate net annual GHG emissions of
2,410 MT CO2e/year (p. 4-75, Table 4.5-1). However, the DEIR’s quantitative GHG analysis is
unsubstantiated. As previously discussed, when we reviewed the Project's CalEEMod output files,
provided in the AQ Report as Appendix B to the DEIR, we found that several of the values inputted into
the model are not consistent with information disclosed in the DEIR. As a result, the model
Page 351
8
underestimates the Project’s emissions, and the DEIR’s quantitative GHG analysis should not be relied
upon to determine Project significance. An updated EIR should be prepared that adequately assesses
the potential GHG impacts that construction and operation of the proposed Project may have on the
surrounding environment.
2) Failure to Consider Performance-based Standards Under CARB’s 2017 Scoping Plan
As previously discussed, the DEIR concludes that the Project would be consistent with CARB’s 2017
Climate Change Scoping Plan (p. 4-77 – 4-81). However, this is incorrect, as the DEIR fails to consider
performance-based measures proposed by CARB.
i. Passenger & Light Duty VMT Per Capita Benchmarks per SB 375
In reaching the State’s long-term GHG emission reduction goals, CARB’s 2017 Scoping Plan explicitly
cites to SB 375 and the VMT reductions anticipated under the implementation of Sustainable
Community Strategies.12 CARB has identified the population and daily VMT from passenger autos and
light-duty vehicles at the state and county level for each year between 2010 to 2050 under a “baseline
scenario” that includes “current projections of VMT included in the existing Regional Transportation
Plans/Sustainable Communities Strategies (RTP/SCSs) adopted by the State’s 18 Metropolitan Planning
Organizations (MPOs) pursuant to SB 375 as of 2015.”13 By dividing the projected daily VMT by the
population, we calculated the daily VMT per capita for each year at the state and county level for 2010
(baseline year), 2023 (Project operational year), and 2030 (target years under SB 32) (see table below).
2017 Scoping Plan Daily VMT Per Capita
San Bernardino County State
Year Population LDV VMT Baseline VMT Per Capita Population LDV VMT Baseline VMT Per Capita
2010 2,043,484 55,741,307.23 27.28 37,335,085 836,463,980.46 22.40
2023 2,302,993 62,347,922.72 27.07 41,659,526 924,184,228.61 22.18
2030 2,478,888 65,538,854.28 26.44 43,939,250 957,178,153.19 21.78
As the DEIR fails to evaluate the Project’s consistency with the CARB 2017 Scoping Plan performance-
based daily VMT per capita projections, the DEIR’s claim that the proposed Project would not conflict
with the CARB 2017 Scoping Plan is unsupported. An updated EIR should be prepared for the proposed
Project to provide additional information and analysis to conclude less-than-significant GHG impacts.
3) Failure to Consider Performance-based Standards under SCAG’s RTP/SCS
As previously discussed, the DEIR concludes that the Project would be consistent with SCAG’s RTP/SCS
(p. 4-77). However, the DEIR fails to consider whether or not the Project meets any of the specific
12 “California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan.” CARB, November 2017, available at:
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf, p. 25, 98, 101-103.
13 “Supporting Calculations for 2017 Scoping Plan-Identified VMT Reductions,” Excel Sheet “Readme.” CARB,
January 2019, available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-
01/sp_mss_vmt_calculations_jan19_0.xlsx.
Page 352
9
performance-based goals underlying SCAG’s RTP/SCS and SB 375, such as: i) per capita GHG emission
targets, or ii) daily vehicles miles traveled (“VMT”) per capita benchmarks.
i. SB 375 Per Capita GHG Emission Goals
SB 375 was signed into law in September 2008 to enhance the state’s ability to reach AB 32 goals by
directing CARB to develop regional 2020 and 2035 GHG emission reduction targets for passenger
vehicles (autos and light-duty trucks). In March 2018, CARB adopted updated regional targets requiring a
19 percent decrease in VMT for the SCAG region by 2035. This goal is reflected in SCAG’s 2020 RTP/SCS
Program Environmental Impact Report (“PEIR”), in which the 2020 RTP/SCS PEIR updates the per capita
emissions to 18.8 lbs/day in 2035 (see excerpt below). 14
As the DEIR fails to evaluate the Project’s consistency with the SCAG’s per capita emissions, the DEIR’s
claim that the proposed Project would not conflict with SCAG’s RTP/SCS is unsupported. An updated EIR
should be prepared for the proposed Project to provide additional information and analysis to conclude
less-than-significant GHG impacts.
ii. SB 375 RTP/SCS Daily VMT Per Capita Target
Under the SCAG’s 2020 RTP/SCS, daily VMT per capita in the SCAG region should decrease from 23.2
VMT in 2016 to 20.7 VMT by 2045.15 Daily VMT per capita in Los Angeles County should decrease from
22.2 to 19.2 VMT during that same period.16 Here, however, the DEIR fails to consider any of the above-
mentioned performance-based VMT targets. As the DEIR fails to evaluate the Project’s consistency with
the SCAG’s performance-based daily VMT per capita projections, the DEIR’s claim that the proposed
Project would not conflict with SCAG’s RTP/SCS is unsupported. An updated EIR should be prepared for
14 “Connect SoCal Certified Final Program Environmental Impact Report.” SCAG, May 2020, available at:
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/fpeir_connectsocal_complete.pdf?1607981618, p. 3.8-74.
15 “Connect SoCal.” SCAG, September 2020, available at: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-
attachments/0903fconnectsocal-plan_0.pdf?1606001176, pp. 138.
16 “Connect SoCal.” SCAG, September 2020, available at: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-
attachments/0903fconnectsocal-plan_0.pdf?1606001176, pp. 138.
Page 353
10
the proposed Project to provide additional information and analysis to conclude less-than-significant
GHG impacts. Disclaimer
SWAPE has received limited discovery regarding this project. Additional information may become
available in the future; thus, we retain the right to revise or amend this report when additional
information becomes available. Our professional services have been performed using that degree of
care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants
practicing in this or similar localities at the time of service. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is
made as to the scope of work, work methodologies and protocols, site conditions, analytical testing
results, and findings presented. This report reflects efforts which were limited to information that was
reasonably accessible at the time of the work, and may contain informational gaps, inconsistencies, or
otherwise be incomplete due to the unavailability or uncertainty of information obtained or provided by
third parties.
Sincerely,
Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D.
Attachment A: Matt Hagemann CV
Attachment B: Paul E. Rosenfeld CV
Page 354
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949) 887-9013
mhagemann@swape.com
Matthew F. Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., QSD, QSP
Geologic and Hydrogeologic Characterization
Investigation and Remediation Strategies
Litigation Support and Testifying Expert
Industrial Stormwater Compliance
CEQA Review
Education:
M.S. Degree, Geology, California State University Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 1984.
B.A. Degree, Geology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA, 1982.
Professional Certifications:
California Professional Geologist
California Certified Hydrogeologist
Qualified SWPPP Developer and Practitioner
Professional Experience:
Matt has 30 years of experience in environmental policy, contaminant assessment and remediation,
stormwater compliance, and CEQA review. He spent nine years with the U.S. EPA in the RCRA and
Superfund programs and served as EPA’s Senior Science Policy Advisor in the Western Regional
Office where he identified emerging threats to groundwater from perchlorate and MTBE. While with
EPA, Matt also served as a Senior Hydrogeologist in the oversight of the assessment of seven major
military facilities undergoing base closure. He led numerous enforcement actions under provisions of
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and directed efforts to improve hydrogeologic
characterization and water quality monitoring. For the past 15 years, as a founding partner with SWAPE,
Matt has developed extensive client relationships and has managed complex projects that include
consultation as an expert witness and a regulatory specialist, and a manager of projects ranging from
industrial stormwater compliance to CEQA review of impacts from hazardous waste, air quality and
greenhouse gas emissions.
Positions Matt has held include:
•Founding Partner, Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE) (2003 – present);
•Geology Instructor, Golden West College, 2010 – 2104, 2017;
•Senior Environmental Analyst, Komex H2O Science, Inc. (2000 ‐‐ 2003);
Attachment E
Page 355
2
• Executive Director, Orange Coast Watch (2001 – 2004);
• Senior Science Policy Advisor and Hydrogeologist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989–
1998);
• Hydrogeologist, National Park Service, Water Resources Division (1998 – 2000);
• Adjunct Faculty Member, San Francisco State University, Department of Geosciences (1993 –
1998);
• Instructor, College of Marin, Department of Science (1990 – 1995);
• Geologist, U.S. Forest Service (1986 – 1998); and
• Geologist, Dames & Moore (1984 – 1986).
Senior Regulatory and Litigation Support Analyst:
With SWAPE, Matt’s responsibilities have included:
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of over 300 environmental impact reports
and negative declarations since 2003 under CEQA that identify significant issues with regard
to hazardous waste, water resources, water quality, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions,
and geologic hazards. Make recommendations for additional mitigation measures to lead
agencies at the local and county level to include additional characterization of health risks
and implementation of protective measures to reduce worker exposure to hazards from
toxins and Valley Fever.
• Stormwater analysis, sampling and best management practice evaluation at more than 100 industrial
facilities.
• Expert witness on numerous cases including, for example, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)
contamination of groundwater, MTBE litigation, air toxins at hazards at a school, CERCLA
compliance in assessment and remediation, and industrial stormwater contamination.
• Technical assistance and litigation support for vapor intrusion concerns.
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of environmental issues in license applications
for large solar power plants before the California Energy Commission.
• Manager of a project to evaluate numerous formerly used military sites in the western U.S.
• Manager of a comprehensive evaluation of potential sources of perchlorate contamination in
Southern California drinking water wells.
• Manager and designated expert for litigation support under provisions of Proposition 65 in the
review of releases of gasoline to sources drinking water at major refineries and hundreds of gas
stations throughout California.
With Komex H2O Science Inc., Matt’s duties included the following:
• Senior author of a report on the extent of perchlorate contamination that was used in testimony
by the former U.S. EPA Administrator and General Counsel.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology
of MTBE use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology
of perchlorate use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in a study that estimates nationwide costs for MTBE remediation and drinking
water treatment, results of which were published in newspapers nationwide and in testimony
against provisions of an energy bill that would limit liability for oil companies.
• Research to support litigation to restore drinking water supplies that have been contaminated by
MTBE in California and New York.
Page 356
3
• Expert witness testimony in a case of oil production‐related contamination in Mississippi.
• Lead author for a multi‐volume remedial investigation report for an operating school in Los
Angeles that met strict regulatory requirements and rigorous deadlines.
• Development of strategic approaches for cleanup of contaminated sites in consultation with
clients and regulators.
Executive Director:
As Executive Director with Orange Coast Watch, Matt led efforts to restore water quality at Orange
County beaches from multiple sources of contamination including urban runoff and the discharge of
wastewater. In reporting to a Board of Directors that included representatives from leading Orange
County universities and businesses, Matt prepared issue papers in the areas of treatment and disinfection
of wastewater and control of the discharge of grease to sewer systems. Matt actively participated in the
development of countywide water quality permits for the control of urban runoff and permits for the
discharge of wastewater. Matt worked with other nonprofits to protect and restore water quality, including
Surfrider, Natural Resources Defense Council and Orange County CoastKeeper as well as with business
institutions including the Orange County Business Council.
Hydrogeology:
As a Senior Hydrogeologist with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Matt led investigations to
characterize and cleanup closing military bases, including Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Hunters Point
Naval Shipyard, Treasure Island Naval Station, Alameda Naval Station, Moffett Field, Mather Army
Airfield, and Sacramento Army Depot. Specific activities were as follows:
• Led efforts to model groundwater flow and contaminant transport, ensured adequacy of
monitoring networks, and assessed cleanup alternatives for contaminated sediment, soil, and
groundwater.
• Initiated a regional program for evaluation of groundwater sampling practices and laboratory
analysis at military bases.
• Identified emerging issues, wrote technical guidance, and assisted in policy and regulation
development through work on four national U.S. EPA workgroups, including the Superfund
Groundwater Technical Forum and the Federal Facilities Forum.
At the request of the State of Hawaii, Matt developed a methodology to determine the vulnerability of
groundwater to contamination on the islands of Maui and Oahu. He used analytical models and a GIS to
show zones of vulnerability, and the results were adopted and published by the State of Hawaii and
County of Maui.
As a hydrogeologist with the EPA Groundwater Protection Section, Matt worked with provisions of the
Safe Drinking Water Act and NEPA to prevent drinking water contamination. Specific activities included
the following:
• Received an EPA Bronze Medal for his contribution to the development of national guidance for
the protection of drinking water.
• Managed the Sole Source Aquifer Program and protected the drinking water of two communities
through designation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. He prepared geologic reports, conducted
Page 357
4
public hearings, and responded to public comments from residents who were very concerned
about the impact of designation.
• Reviewed a number of Environmental Impact Statements for planned major developments,
including large hazardous and solid waste disposal facilities, mine reclamation, and water
transfer.
Matt served as a hydrogeologist with the RCRA Hazardous Waste program. Duties were as follows:
• Supervised the hydrogeologic investigation of hazardous waste sites to determine compliance
with Subtitle C requirements.
• Reviewed and wrote ʺpart Bʺ permits for the disposal of hazardous waste.
• Conducted RCRA Corrective Action investigations of waste sites and led inspections that formed
the basis for significant enforcement actions that were developed in close coordination with U.S.
EPA legal counsel.
• Wrote contract specifications and supervised contractor’s investigations of waste sites.
With the National Park Service, Matt directed service‐wide investigations of contaminant sources to
prevent degradation of water quality, including the following tasks:
• Applied pertinent laws and regulations including CERCLA, RCRA, NEPA, NRDA, and the
Clean Water Act to control military, mining, and landfill contaminants.
• Conducted watershed‐scale investigations of contaminants at parks, including Yellowstone and
Olympic National Park.
• Identified high‐levels of perchlorate in soil adjacent to a national park in New Mexico
and advised park superintendent on appropriate response actions under CERCLA.
• Served as a Park Service representative on the Interagency Perchlorate Steering Committee, a
national workgroup.
• Developed a program to conduct environmental compliance audits of all National Parks while
serving on a national workgroup.
• Co‐authored two papers on the potential for water contamination from the operation of personal
watercraft and snowmobiles, these papers serving as the basis for the development of nation‐
wide policy on the use of these vehicles in National Parks.
• Contributed to the Federal Multi‐Agency Source Water Agreement under the Clean Water
Action Plan.
Policy:
Served senior management as the Senior Science Policy Advisor with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 9.
Activities included the following:
• Advised the Regional Administrator and senior management on emerging issues such as the
potential for the gasoline additive MTBE and ammonium perchlorate to contaminate drinking
water supplies.
• Shaped EPA’s national response to these threats by serving on workgroups and by contributing
to guidance, including the Office of Research and Development publication, Oxygenates in
Water: Critical Information and Research Needs.
• Improved the technical training of EPAʹs scientific and engineering staff.
• Earned an EPA Bronze Medal for representing the region’s 300 scientists and engineers in
negotiations with the Administrator and senior management to better integrate scientific
Page 358
5
principles into the policy‐making process.
• Established national protocol for the peer review of scientific documents.
Geology:
With the U.S. Forest Service, Matt led investigations to determine hillslope stability of areas proposed for
timber harvest in the central Oregon Coast Range. Specific activities were as follows:
• Mapped geology in the field, and used aerial photographic interpretation and mathematical
models to determine slope stability.
• Coordinated his research with community members who were concerned with natural resource
protection.
• Characterized the geology of an aquifer that serves as the sole source of drinking water for the
city of Medford, Oregon.
As a consultant with Dames and Moore, Matt led geologic investigations of two contaminated sites (later
listed on the Superfund NPL) in the Portland, Oregon, area and a large hazardous waste site in eastern
Oregon. Duties included the following:
• Supervised year‐long effort for soil and groundwater sampling.
• Conducted aquifer tests.
• Investigated active faults beneath sites proposed for hazardous waste disposal.
Teaching:
From 1990 to 1998, Matt taught at least one course per semester at the community college and university
levels:
• At San Francisco State University, held an adjunct faculty position and taught courses in
environmental geology, oceanography (lab and lecture), hydrogeology, and groundwater
contamination.
• Served as a committee member for graduate and undergraduate students.
• Taught courses in environmental geology and oceanography at the College of Marin.
Matt is currently a part time geology instructor at Golden West College in Huntington Beach, California
where he taught from 2010 to 2014 and in 2017.
Invited Testimony, Reports, Papers and Presentations:
Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Presentation to the Public
Environmental Law Conference, Eugene, Oregon.
Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Invited presentation to U.S.
EPA Region 9, San Francisco, California.
Hagemann, M.F., 2005. Use of Electronic Databases in Environmental Regulation, Policy Making and
Public Participation. Brownfields 2005, Denver, Coloradao.
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in Nevada and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Las
Vegas, NV (served on conference organizing committee).
Page 359
6
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Invited testimony to a California Senate committee hearing on air toxins at
schools in Southern California, Los Angeles.
Brown, A., Farrow, J., Gray, A. and Hagemann, M., 2004. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE
Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells.
Presentation to the Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference, National Groundwater
Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in Arizona and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust,
Phoenix, AZ (served on conference organizing committee).
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in the Southwestern U.S. Invited presentation to a special committee meeting of the National Academy
of Sciences, Irvine, CA.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a
tribal EPA meeting, Pechanga, CA.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a
meeting of tribal repesentatives, Parker, AZ.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Impact of Perchlorate on the Colorado River and Associated Drinking Water
Supplies. Invited presentation to the Inter‐Tribal Meeting, Torres Martinez Tribe.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. The Emergence of Perchlorate as a Widespread Drinking Water Contaminant.
Invited presentation to the U.S. EPA Region 9.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. A Deductive Approach to the Assessment of Perchlorate Contamination. Invited
presentation to the California Assembly Natural Resources Committee.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate: A Cold War Legacy in Drinking Water. Presentation to a meeting of
the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Presentation to a
meeting of the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater and an Estimate of Costs to Address
Impacts to Groundwater. Presentation to the annual meeting of the Society of Environmental
Journalists.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of the Cost to Address MTBE Contamination in Groundwater
(and Who Will Pay). Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage
Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells. Presentation to a meeting of the U.S. EPA and
State Underground Storage Tank Program managers.
Page 360
7
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Unpublished
report.
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Cleanup Cost for MTBE in Groundwater Used as Drinking Water.
Unpublished report.
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks. Unpublished report.
Hagemann, M.F., and VanMouwerik, M., 1999. Potential W a t e r Quality Concerns Related
to Snowmobile Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.
VanMouwerik, M. and Hagemann, M.F. 1999, Water Quality Concerns Related to Personal Watercraft
Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.
Hagemann, M.F., 1999, Is Dilution the Solution to Pollution in National Parks? The George Wright
Society Biannual Meeting, Asheville, North Carolina.
Hagemann, M.F., 1997, The Potential for MTBE to Contaminate Groundwater. U.S. EPA Superfund
Groundwater Technical Forum Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Hagemann, M.F., and Gill, M., 1996, Impediments to Intrinsic Remediation, Moffett Field Naval Air
Station, Conference on Intrinsic Remediation of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons, Salt Lake City.
Hagemann, M.F., Fukunaga, G.L., 1996, The Vulnerability of Groundwater to Anthropogenic
Contaminants on the Island of Maui, Hawaii. Hawaii Water Works Association Annual Meeting, Maui,
October 1996.
Hagemann, M. F., Fukanaga, G. L., 1996, Ranking Groundwater Vulnerability in Central Oahu,
Hawaii. Proceedings, Geographic Information Systems in Environmental Resources Management, Air
and Waste Management Association Publication VIP‐61.
Hagemann, M.F., 1994. Groundwater Ch ar ac te r i z a t i o n and Cl ean up a t Closing Military Bases
in California. Proceedings, California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.
Hagemann, M.F. and Sabol, M.A., 1993. Role of the U.S. EPA in the High Plains States Groundwater
Recharge Demonstration Program. Proceedings, Sixth Biennial Symposium on the Artificial Recharge of
Groundwater.
Hagemann, M.F., 1993. U.S. EPA Policy on the Technical Impracticability of the Cleanup of DNAPL‐
contaminated Groundwater. California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.
Page 361
8
Hagemann, M.F., 1992. Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Contamination of Groundwater: An Ounce of
Prevention... Proceedings, Association of Engineering Geologists Annual Meeting, v. 35.
Other Experience:
Selected as subject matter expert for the California Professional Geologist licensing examinations,
2009‐2011.
Page 362
SOIL WATER AIR PROTECTION ENTERPRISE
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, California 90405
Attn: Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.
Mobil: (310) 795-2335
Office: (310) 452-5555
Fax: (310) 452-5550
Email: prosenfeld@swape.com
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 1 of 10 October 2021
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.Chemical Fate and Transport & Air Dispersion Modeling
Principal Environmental Chemist Risk Assessment & Remediation Specialist
Education
Ph.D. Soil Chemistry, University of Washington, 1999. Dissertation on volatile organic compound filtration.
M.S. Environmental Science, U.C. Berkeley, 1995. Thesis on organic waste economics.
B.A. Environmental Studies, U.C. Santa Barbara, 1991. Thesis on wastewater treatment.
Professional Experience
Dr. Rosenfeld has over 25 years’ experience conducting environmental investigations and risk assessments for
evaluating impacts to human health, property, and ecological receptors. His expertise focuses on the fate and
transport of environmental contaminants, human health risk, exposure assessment, and ecological restoration. Dr.
Rosenfeld has evaluated and modeled emissions from oil spills, landfills, boilers and incinerators, process stacks,
storage tanks, confined animal feeding operations, industrial, military and agricultural sources, unconventional oil
drilling operations, and locomotive and construction engines. His project experience ranges from monitoring and
modeling of pollution sources to evaluating impacts of pollution on workers at industrial facilities and residents in
surrounding communities. Dr. Rosenfeld has also successfully modeled exposure to contaminants distributed by
water systems and via vapor intrusion.
Dr. Rosenfeld has investigated and designed remediation programs and risk assessments for contaminated sites
containing lead, heavy metals, mold, bacteria, particulate matter, petroleum hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents,
pesticides, radioactive waste, dioxins and furans, semi- and volatile organic compounds, PCBs, PAHs, creosote,
perchlorate, asbestos, per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFOA/PFOS), unusual polymers, fuel oxygenates
(MTBE), among other pollutants. Dr. Rosenfeld also has experience evaluating greenhouse gas emissions from
various projects and is an expert on the assessment of odors from industrial and agricultural sites, as well as the
evaluation of odor nuisance impacts and technologies for abatement of odorous emissions. As a principal scientist
at SWAPE, Dr. Rosenfeld directs air dispersion modeling and exposure assessments. He has served as an expert
witness and testified about pollution sources causing nuisance and/or personal injury at sites and has testified as an
expert witness on numerous cases involving exposure to soil, water and air contaminants from industrial, railroad,
agricultural, and military sources.
Attachment F
Page 363
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 2 of 10 October 2021
Professional History:
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE); 2003 to present; Principal and Founding Partner
UCLA School of Public Health; 2007 to 2011; Lecturer (Assistant Researcher)
UCLA School of Public Health; 2003 to 2006; Adjunct Professor
UCLA Environmental Science and Engineering Program; 2002-2004; Doctoral Intern Coordinator
UCLA Institute of the Environment, 2001-2002; Research Associate
Komex H2O Science, 2001 to 2003; Senior Remediation Scientist
National Groundwater Association, 2002-2004; Lecturer
San Diego State University, 1999-2001; Adjunct Professor
Anteon Corp., San Diego, 2000-2001; Remediation Project Manager
Ogden (now Amec), San Diego, 2000-2000; Remediation Project Manager
Bechtel, San Diego, California, 1999 – 2000; Risk Assessor
King County, Seattle, 1996 – 1999; Scientist
James River Corp., Washington, 1995-96; Scientist
Big Creek Lumber, Davenport, California, 1995; Scientist
Plumas Corp., California and USFS, Tahoe 1993-1995; Scientist
Peace Corps and World Wildlife Fund, St. Kitts, West Indies, 1991-1993; Scientist
Publications:
Remy, L.L., Clay T., Byers, V., Rosenfeld P. E. (2019) Hospital, Health, and Community Burden After Oil
Refinery Fires, Richmond, California 2007 and 2012. Environmental Health. 18:48
Simons, R.A., Seo, Y. Rosenfeld, P., (2015) Modeling the Effect of Refinery Emission On Residential Property
Value. Journal of Real Estate Research. 27(3):321-342
Chen, J. A, Zapata A. R., Sutherland A. J., Molmen, D.R., Chow, B. S., Wu, L. E., Rosenfeld, P. E., Hesse, R. C.,
(2012) Sulfur Dioxide and Volatile Organic Compound Exposure To A Community In Texas City Texas Evaluated
Using Aermod and Empirical Data. American Journal of Environmental Science, 8(6), 622-632.
Rosenfeld, P.E. & Feng, L. (2011). The Risks of Hazardous Waste. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2011). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Agrochemical Industry, Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Gonzalez, J., Feng, L., Sutherland, A., Waller, C., Sok, H., Hesse, R., Rosenfeld, P. (2010). PCBs and
Dioxins/Furans in Attic Dust Collected Near Former PCB Production and Secondary Copper Facilities in Sauget, IL.
Procedia Environmental Sciences. 113–125.
Feng, L., Wu, C., Tam, L., Sutherland, A.J., Clark, J.J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Dioxin and Furan Blood Lipid and
Attic Dust Concentrations in Populations Living Near Four Wood Treatment Facilities in the United States. Journal
of Environmental Health. 73(6), 34-46.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Wood and Paper Industries. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2009). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Petroleum Industry. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living
near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Air
Pollution, 123 (17), 319-327.
Page 364
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 3 of 10 October 2021
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). A Statistical Analysis Of Attic Dust And Blood Lipid
Concentrations Of Tetrachloro-p-Dibenzodioxin (TCDD) Toxicity Equivalency Quotients (TEQ) In Two
Populations Near Wood Treatment Facilities. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 002252-002255.
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). Methods For Collect Samples For Assessing Dioxins
And Other Environmental Contaminants In Attic Dust: A Review. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 000527-
000530.
Hensley, A.R. A. Scott, J. J. J. Clark, Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Attic Dust and Human Blood Samples Collected near
a Former Wood Treatment Facility. Environmental Research. 105, 194-197.
Rosenfeld, P.E., J. J. J. Clark, A. R. Hensley, M. Suffet. (2007). The Use of an Odor Wheel Classification for
Evaluation of Human Health Risk Criteria for Compost Facilities. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 345-357.
Rosenfeld, P. E., M. Suffet. (2007). The Anatomy Of Odour Wheels For Odours Of Drinking Water, Wastewater,
Compost And The Urban Environment. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 335-344.
Sullivan, P. J. Clark, J.J.J., Agardy, F. J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Toxic Legacy, Synthetic Toxins in the Food,
Water, and Air in American Cities. Boston Massachusetts: Elsevier Publishing
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash. Water Science
and Technology. 49(9),171-178.
Rosenfeld P. E., J.J. Clark, I.H. (Mel) Suffet (2004). The Value of An Odor-Quality-Wheel Classification Scheme
For The Urban Environment. Water Environment Federation’s Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC)
2004. New Orleans, October 2-6, 2004.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet, I.H. (2004). Understanding Odorants Associated With Compost, Biomass Facilities,
and the Land Application of Biosolids. Water Science and Technology. 49(9), 193-199.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash, Water Science
and Technology, 49( 9), 171-178.
Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M. A., Sellew, P. (2004). Measurement of Biosolids Odor and Odorant Emissions from
Windrows, Static Pile and Biofilter. Water Environment Research. 76(4), 310-315.
Rosenfeld, P.E., Grey, M and Suffet, M. (2002). Compost Demonstration Project, Sacramento California Using
High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Integrated Waste Management
Board Public Affairs Office, Publications Clearinghouse (MS–6), Sacramento, CA Publication #442-02-008.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Characterization of odor emissions from three different biosolids. Water
Soil and Air Pollution. 127(1-4), 173-191.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2000). Wood ash control of odor emissions from biosolids application. Journal
of Environmental Quality. 29, 1662-1668.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry and D. Bennett. (2001). Wastewater dewatering polymer affect on biosolids odor
emissions and microbial activity. Water Environment Research. 73(4), 363-367.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Activated Carbon and Wood Ash Sorption of Wastewater, Compost, and
Biosolids Odorants. Water Environment Research, 73, 388-393.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2001). High carbon wood ash effect on biosolids microbial activity and odor.
Water Environment Research. 131(1-4), 247-262.
Page 365
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 4 of 10 October 2021
Chollack, T. and P. Rosenfeld. (1998). Compost Amendment Handbook For Landscaping. Prepared for and
distributed by the City of Redmond, Washington State.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1992). The Mount Liamuiga Crater Trail. Heritage Magazine of St. Kitts, 3(2).
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1993). High School Biogas Project to Prevent Deforestation On St. Kitts. Biomass Users
Network, 7(1).
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions From Biosolids
Application To Forest Soil. Doctoral Thesis. University of Washington College of Forest Resources.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1994). Potential Utilization of Small Diameter Trees on Sierra County Public Land. Masters
thesis reprinted by the Sierra County Economic Council. Sierra County, California.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1991). How to Build a Small Rural Anaerobic Digester & Uses Of Biogas In The First And Third
World. Bachelors Thesis. University of California.
Presentations:
Rosenfeld, P.E., "The science for Perfluorinated Chemicals (PFAS): What makes remediation so hard?" Law
Seminars International, (May 9-10, 2018) 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 101 Seattle, WA.
Rosenfeld, P.E., Sutherland, A; Hesse, R.; Zapata, A. (October 3-6, 2013). Air dispersion modeling of volatile
organic emissions from multiple natural gas wells in Decatur, TX. 44th Western Regional Meeting, American
Chemical Society. Lecture conducted from Santa Clara, CA.
Sok, H.L.; Waller, C.C.; Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sutherland, A.J.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; Hesse, R.C.;
Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Atrazine: A Persistent Pesticide in Urban Drinking Water.
Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.
Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sok, H.L.; Sutherland, A.J.; Waller, C.C.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; La, M.; Hesse,
R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Bringing Environmental Justice to East St. Louis,
Illinois. Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Perfluoroctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluoroactane Sulfonate (PFOS)
Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United
States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting , Lecture conducted
from Tuscon, AZ.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Cost to Filter Atrazine Contamination from Drinking Water in the United
States” Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the
United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting. Lecture
conducted from Tuscon, AZ.
Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (20-22 July, 2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in
populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. Brebbia, C.A. and Popov, V., eds., Air
Pollution XVII: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Modeling, Monitoring and
Management of Air Pollution. Lecture conducted from Tallinn, Estonia.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Moss Point Community Exposure To Contaminants From A Releasing
Facility. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from
University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). The Repeated Trespass of Tritium-Contaminated Water Into A
Surrounding Community Form Repeated Waste Spills From A Nuclear Power Plant. The 23rd Annual International
Page 366
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 5 of 10 October 2021
Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst
MA.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Somerville Community Exposure To Contaminants From Wood Treatment
Facility Emissions. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Lecture conducted
from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Production, Chemical Properties, Toxicology, & Treatment Case Studies of 1,2,3-
Trichloropropane (TCP). The Association for Environmental Health and Sciences (AEHS) Annual Meeting. Lecture
conducted from San Diego, CA.
Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Blood and Attic Sampling for Dioxin/Furan, PAH, and Metal Exposure in Florala,
Alabama. The AEHS Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA.
Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (August 21 – 25, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And
Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. The 26th International Symposium on
Halogenated Persistent Organic Pollutants – DIOXIN2006. Lecture conducted from Radisson SAS Scandinavia
Hotel in Oslo Norway.
Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (November 4-8, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And
Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility . APHA 134 Annual Meeting &
Exposition. Lecture conducted from Boston Massachusetts.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (October 24-25, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.
Mealey’s C8/PFOA. Science, Risk & Litigation Conference. Lecture conducted from The Rittenhouse Hotel,
Philadelphia, PA.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human
Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton
Hotel, Irvine California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Fate, Transport, Toxicity, And Persistence of 1,2,3-TCP. PEMA
Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel in Irvine, California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 26-27, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PDBEs. Mealey’s Groundwater
Conference. Lecture conducted from Ritz Carlton Hotel, Marina Del Ray, California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (June 7-8, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.
International Society of Environmental Forensics: Focus On Emerging Contaminants. Lecture conducted from
Sheraton Oceanfront Hotel, Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Fate Transport, Persistence and Toxicology of PFOA and Related
Perfluorochemicals. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water And Environmental Law Conference.
Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human
Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water and
Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. and Rob Hesse R.G. (May 5-6, 2004). Tert-butyl Alcohol Liability
and Toxicology, A National Problem and Unquantified Liability. National Groundwater Association. Environmental
Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Congress Plaza Hotel, Chicago Illinois.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (March 2004). Perchlorate Toxicology. Meeting of the American Groundwater Trust.
Lecture conducted from Phoenix Arizona.
Page 367
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 6 of 10 October 2021
Hagemann, M.F., Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and Rob Hesse (2004). Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River.
Meeting of tribal representatives. Lecture conducted from Parker, AZ.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (April 7, 2004). A National Damage Assessment Model For PCE and Dry Cleaners.
Drycleaner Symposium. California Ground Water Association. Lecture conducted from Radison Hotel, Sacramento,
California.
Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M., (June 2003) Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Seventh
International In Situ And On Site Bioremediation Symposium Battelle Conference Orlando, FL.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. (February 20-21, 2003) Understanding Historical Use, Chemical
Properties, Toxicity and Regulatory Guidance of 1,4 Dioxane. National Groundwater Association. Southwest Focus
Conference. Water Supply and Emerging Contaminants.. Lecture conducted from Hyatt Regency Phoenix Arizona.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (February 6-7, 2003). Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. California
CUPA Forum. Lecture conducted from Marriott Hotel, Anaheim California.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (October 23, 2002) Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. EPA
Underground Storage Tank Roundtable. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Understanding Odor from Compost, Wastewater and
Industrial Processes. Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water
Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Using High Carbon Wood Ash to Control Compost Odor.
Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association . Lecture
conducted from Barcelona Spain.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (September 22-24, 2002). Biocycle Composting For Coastal Sage Restoration.
Northwest Biosolids Management Association. Lecture conducted from Vancouver Washington..
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (November 11-14, 2002). Using High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a
Green Materials Composting Facility. Soil Science Society Annual Conference. Lecture conducted from
Indianapolis, Maryland.
Rosenfeld. P.E. (September 16, 2000). Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Water
Environment Federation. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California.
Rosenfeld. P.E. (October 16, 2000). Wood ash and biofilter control of compost odor. Biofest. Lecture conducted
from Ocean Shores, California.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (2000). Bioremediation Using Organic Soil Amendments. California Resource Recovery
Association. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur
Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th
Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue
Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (1999). An evaluation of ash incorporation with biosolids for odor reduction. Soil
Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Salt Lake City Utah.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Comparison of Microbial Activity and Odor Emissions from
Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Brown and Caldwell. Lecture conducted from Seattle Washington.
Page 368
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 7 of 10 October 2021
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions from
Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Lake Chelan, Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E, C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur
Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th
Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue
Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. B. Harrison, and R. Dills. (1997). Comparison of Odor Emissions From Three
Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Soil Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Anaheim
California.
Teaching Experience:
UCLA Department of Environmental Health (Summer 2003 through 20010) Taught Environmental Health Science
100 to students, including undergrad, medical doctors, public health professionals and nurses. Course focused on
the health effects of environmental contaminants.
National Ground Water Association, Successful Remediation Technologies. Custom Course in Sante Fe, New
Mexico. May 21, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of fuel contaminants associated with underground storage
tanks.
National Ground Water Association; Successful Remediation Technologies Course in Chicago Illinois. April 1,
2002. Focused on fate and transport of contaminants associated with Superfund and RCRA sites.
California Integrated Waste Management Board, April and May, 2001. Alternative Landfill Caps Seminar in San
Diego, Ventura, and San Francisco. Focused on both prescriptive and innovative landfill cover design.
UCLA Department of Environmental Engineering, February 5, 2002. Seminar on Successful Remediation
Technologies focusing on Groundwater Remediation.
University Of Washington, Soil Science Program, Teaching Assistant for several courses including: Soil Chemistry,
Organic Soil Amendments, and Soil Stability.
U.C. Berkeley, Environmental Science Program Teaching Assistant for Environmental Science 10.
Academic Grants Awarded:
California Integrated Waste Management Board. $41,000 grant awarded to UCLA Institute of the Environment.
Goal: To investigate effect of high carbon wood ash on volatile organic emissions from compost. 2001.
Synagro Technologies, Corona California: $10,000 grant awarded to San Diego State University.
Goal: investigate effect of biosolids for restoration and remediation of degraded coastal sage soils. 2000.
King County, Department of Research and Technology, Washington State. $100,000 grant awarded to University of
Washington: Goal: To investigate odor emissions from biosolids application and the effect of polymers and ash on
VOC emissions. 1998.
Northwest Biosolids Management Association, Washington State. $20,000 grant awarded to investigate effect of
polymers and ash on VOC emissions from biosolids. 1997.
James River Corporation, Oregon: $10,000 grant was awarded to investigate the success of genetically engineered
Poplar trees with resistance to round-up. 1996.
Page 369
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 8 of 10 October 2021
United State Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest: $15,000 grant was awarded to investigating fire ecology of the
Tahoe National Forest. 1995.
Kellogg Foundation, Washington D.C. $500 grant was awarded to construct a large anaerobic digester on St. Kitts
in West Indies. 1993
Deposition and/or Trial Testimony:
In the Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois
Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 0i9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition, 5-14-2021
Trial, October 8-4-2021
In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois
Joseph Rafferty, Plaintiff vs. Consolidated Rail Corporation and National Railroad Passenger Corporation
d/b/a AMTRAK,
Case No.: No. 18-L-6845
Rosenfeld Deposition, 6-28-2021
In the United States District Court For the Northern District of Illinois
Theresa Romcoe, Plaintiff vs. Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation d/b/a METRA
Rail, Defendants
Case No.: No. 17-cv-8517
Rosenfeld Deposition, 5-25-2021
In the Superior Court of the State of Arizona In and For the Cunty of Maricopa
Mary Tryon et al., Plaintiff vs. The City of Pheonix v. Cox Cactus Farm, L.L.C., Utah Shelter Systems, Inc.
Case Number CV20127-094749
Rosenfeld Deposition: 5-7-2021
In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Beaumont Division
Robinson, Jeremy et al Plaintiffs, vs. CNA Insurance Company et al.
Case Number 1:17-cv-000508
Rosenfeld Deposition: 3-25-2021
In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino
Gary Garner, Personal Representative for the Estate of Melvin Garner vs. BNSF Railway Company.
Case No. 1720288
Rosenfeld Deposition 2-23-2021
In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, Spring Street Courthouse
Benny M Rodriguez vs. Union Pacific Railroad, A Corporation, et al.
Case No. 18STCV01162
Rosenfeld Deposition 12-23-2020
In the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri
Karen Cornwell, Plaintiff, vs. Marathon Petroleum, LP, Defendant.
Case No.: 1716-CV10006
Rosenfeld Deposition. 8-30-2019
In the United States District Court For The District of New Jersey
Duarte et al, Plaintiffs, vs. United States Metals Refining Company et. al. Defendant.
Case No.: 2:17-cv-01624-ES-SCM
Rosenfeld Deposition. 6-7-2019
Page 370
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 9 of 10 October 2021
In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division
M/T Carla Maersk, Plaintiffs, vs. Conti 168., Schiffahrts-GMBH & Co. Bulker KG MS “Conti Perdido”
Defendant.
Case No.: 3:15-CV-00106 consolidated with 3:15-CV-00237
Rosenfeld Deposition. 5-9-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica
Carole-Taddeo-Bates et al., vs. Ifran Khan et al., Defendants
Case No.: No. BC615636
Rosenfeld Deposition, 1-26-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica
The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments et al. vs El Adobe Apts. Inc. et al., Defendants
Case No.: No. BC646857
Rosenfeld Deposition, 10-6-2018; Trial 3-7-19
In United States District Court For The District of Colorado
Bells et al. Plaintiff vs. The 3M Company et al., Defendants
Case No.: 1:16-cv-02531-RBJ
Rosenfeld Deposition, 3-15-2018 and 4-3-2018
In The District Court Of Regan County, Texas, 112th Judicial District
Phillip Bales et al., Plaintiff vs. Dow Agrosciences, LLC, et al., Defendants
Cause No.: 1923
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-17-2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Contra Costa
Simons et al., Plaintiffs vs. Chevron Corporation, et al., Defendants
Cause No C12-01481
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-20-2017
In The Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois
Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 0i9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-23-2017
In United States District Court For The Southern District of Mississippi
Guy Manuel vs. The BP Exploration et al., Defendants
Case: No 1:19-cv-00315-RHW
Rosenfeld Deposition, 4-22-2020
In The Superior Court of the State of California, For The County of Los Angeles
Warrn Gilbert and Penny Gilber, Plaintiff vs. BMW of North America LLC
Case No.: LC102019 (c/w BC582154)
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-16-2017, Trail 8-28-2018
In the Northern District Court of Mississippi, Greenville Division
Brenda J. Cooper, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Meritor Inc., et al., Defendants
Case Number: 4:16-cv-52-DMB-JVM
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2017
Page 371
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 10 of 10 October 2021
In The Superior Court of the State of Washington, County of Snohomish
Michael Davis and Julie Davis et al., Plaintiff vs. Cedar Grove Composting Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 13-2-03987-5
Rosenfeld Deposition, February 2017
Trial, March 2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda
Charles Spain., Plaintiff vs. Thermo Fisher Scientific, et al., Defendants
Case No.: RG14711115
Rosenfeld Deposition, September 2015
In The Iowa District Court In And For Poweshiek County
Russell D. Winburn, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Doug Hoksbergen, et al., Defendants
Case No.: LALA002187
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015
In The Circuit Court of Ohio County, West Virginia
Robert Andrews, et al. v. Antero, et al.
Civil Action N0. 14-C-30000
Rosenfeld Deposition, June 2015
In The Iowa District Court For Muscatine County
Laurie Freeman et. al. Plaintiffs vs. Grain Processing Corporation, Defendant
Case No 4980
Rosenfeld Deposition: May 2015
In the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit, in and For Broward County, Florida
Walter Hinton, et. al. Plaintiff, vs. City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a Municipality, Defendant.
Case Number CACE07030358 (26)
Rosenfeld Deposition: December 2014
In the County Court of Dallas County Texas
Lisa Parr et al, Plaintiff, vs. Aruba et al, Defendant.
Case Number cc-11-01650-E
Rosenfeld Deposition: March and September 2013
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Tuscarawas County Ohio
John Michael Abicht, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Republic Services, Inc., et al., Defendants
Case Number: 2008 CT 10 0741 (Cons. w/ 2009 CV 10 0987)
Rosenfeld Deposition: October 2012
In the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, Northern Division
James K. Benefield, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. International Paper Company, Defendant.
Civil Action Number 2:09-cv-232-WHA-TFM
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2010, June 2011
In the Circuit Court of Jefferson County Alabama
Jaeanette Moss Anthony, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Drummond Company Inc., et al., Defendants
Civil Action No. CV 2008-2076
Rosenfeld Deposition: September 2010
In the United States District Court, Western District Lafayette Division
Ackle et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Citgo Petroleum Corporation, et al., Defendants.
Case Number 2:07CV1052
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2009
Page 372
“Responsible Planning Through Environmental Leadership”
2201 N. Grand Avenue #10098 | Santa Ana, CA 92711-0098 | (714) 716-5050
www.ELMTConsulting.com
March 7, 2022
BIRDSEYE PLANNING GROUP, LLC
Contact: Ryan Birdseye
P.O. Box 1956
Vista, California 92805
SUBJECT: Response to Comments for the Addendum for the Jersey Boulevard Industrial
Complex Project
Please find attached ELMT Consulting, Inc. response to comments to address the comments received on
February 17, 2022 from Lozeau Drury LLP for the Jersey Boulevard industrial Complex.
Comment 1: EIR Fails to Establish an Accurate Baseline for Sensitive Biological Resources
The Project Site is in an area that is almost entirely developed with minimal undeveloped parcels mixed
throughout the large industrial buildings with no direct connection to undeveloped/native habitats. The Project
Site has been subject to routine human disturbance associated with the surrounding developments for nearly 30
years. As noted in ELMT’s report, no natural plant communities are present on the Project Site and only heavily
disturbed, human modified areas will be affected by development of the proposed project as clearly shown 2020
biological report.
ELMT’s assessment was conducted in a manor that fully covered the site and field investigation was conducted
to industry standards.
The Project Site has been substantially altered by past development activities in the surrounding area over the last
few decades and does not support high quality habitat for foraging or nesting. Regular site maintenance (weed
clearance, etc.) and lack of vegetation severally reduces the foraging and nesting opportunities. ELMT stands by
its assessment that the site provides limited foraging and nesting opportunities for avian species.
ELMT’s report states:
“No burrowing owls or recent sign (i.e., pellets, feathers, castings, or whitewash) was observed
during the field investigation. The majority of the project site is unvegetated and/or vegetated with
a variety of low-growing plant species that allow for line-of-sight observation favored by burrowing
owls. However, no suitable burrows (>4 inches) were observed during the field investigation.
Further, tall fences, street lights, ornamental trees, and office buildings surround the project site
which decrease the likelihood that burrowing owls would occur on the project site as these features
provide perching opportunities for larger raptor species (i.e., red-tailed hawk [Buteo jamaicensis])
that prey on burrowing owls.
Page 373
March 7, 2022
Page 2
Based on the results of the field investigation and isolation of the undeveloped area on the project
site, it was determined that the project site does not have the potential to support burrowing owls
and focused surveys are not recommended.”
Dr. Smallwood’s statement that states that the Project plans to improperly rely on a future pre-construction survey
to determine the presence/absence of burrowing owls is false. ELMT’s opinion is that the project site does not
support suitable habitat for burrowing owls and burrowing owls are presumed absent. The pre-construction
clearance survey would be conducted out of an abundance of caution to ensure no impacts to nesting birds or
burrowing owls (if they were to stop over on the site) would occur. Pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.3, 3511, and 3513 of the California Fish and
Game Code prohibit the take, possession, or destruction of birds, their nests or eggs), the proposed Project would
be required to protect any nesting birds present on the site. Regulatory compliance with the MBTA and California
Fish and Game Code would require a preconstruction clearance survey for nesting birds be conducted within three
(3) days of the start of any vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities to ensure that no nesting birds will
be disturbed during construction if it occurs between February 1 and August 31. Again, given the disturbed nature
of the project site, and the lack of vegetation present on the site, there is a lack of habitat suitable for use as nesting
sites.
eBird and iNaturalist are citizen databases and are not always accurate in the data they present. ELMT searches
those databases but does not rely on their data for their analysis. Data provided by these two databases would not
change the outcome of ELMT’s original analysis.
Comment 2: EIR Fails to Address the Project’s Potential Significant Impact on Loss of Breeding
Capacity
The Project Site has been substantially altered by past development activities in the surrounding area over the last
few decades and does not support long term breeding habitat for nesting birds. Regular site maintenance (weed
clearance, etc.) and lack of vegetation limits the breeding capacity of the project site. Implementation of the
proposed project would not significantly impact the loss of breeding capacity for nesting birds, especially to the
degree in which Dr. Smallwood references in his comment letter.
Comment 3: EIR Inadequately Analyzed the Project’s Impact on Wildlife Movement
The Project Site has been substantially altered by past development activities in the surrounding area over the last
few decades and does not currently contain functioning native habitat for any wildlife occurring in the area.
Regular site maintenance (weed clearance, etc.) has occurred on the Project Site, and the Project Site is not located
in an existing wildlife migration corridor. Since the project site is surrounded by existing development and does
not support native habitats, ELMT stands by its assessment and implementation of the project will not result in
impacts to wildlife movement.
Comment 4: EIR Fails to Address Impacts on Wildlife from Additional Traffic Generated by the
Project
The comment asserts the impacts of wildlife mortality from traffic generated by the proposed project were not
addressed in the DEIR. The project site is heavily disturbed and surrounded by heavily trafficked streets and
existing industrial buildings that do no support high quality habitat for wildlife species. Further, based on ELMT’s
Page 374
March 7, 2022
Page 3
assessment, the site is not expected to provide suitable habitat for the majority of the special-status wildlife known
to occur in the area. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially increase the level of road mortality
for wildlife, in particular special status species.
Comment 5: EIR Fails to Adequately Address the Project’s Cumulative Impacts on Wildlife in the
Region
As noted, the comment offered encompasses a much larger perspective on impacts to native wildlife and is not
directly applicable to the immediate Project Site since the site is surrounded by existing development. ELMT
stands by its assessment that the project will not result in cumulative impacts to biological resources due to the
lack of resources on and immediately adjacent to the project site.
If you have further questions or comments please do not hesitate to contact Tom McGill at (951) 285-6014
or tmcgill@elmtconsulting.com or Travis McGill at (909) 816-1646 or travismcgill@elmtconsulting.com.
Sincerely,
Thomas J. McGill, Ph.D. Travis J. McGill
Managing Director Director/Biologist
Page 375
P.O. Box 1956, Vista, CA 92085 | (760) 712-2199 | www.birdseyeplanninggroup.com
March 8, 2022
Mr. Vincent Acuna
Associate Planner
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
SUBJECT: Jersey Industrial Complex Draft EIR Appeal Response to Comments
Dear Mr. Acuna:
Birdseye Planning Group (BPG) is pleased to submit the following responses to the Jersey Industrial
Complex Draft Environmental Impact Report appeal letter dated February 17, 2022. The appeal
comments focus on Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas emissions and Biological Resources. The
comments and draft responses are provided as follows:
1. Air Emissions Modeling Failed to Include the 8,127 square foot of office space as a separate
use within the overall warehouse building. Thus, the project failed to accurately estimate daily
operational emissions.
Response: The air emissions model was prepared to provide a conservative estimation of daily air
emissions and annual greenhouse gas emissions associated with operation of the proposed project.
The modeling focus was on mobile source emissions, specifically, heavy truck emissions. However,
area and energy sources were also modeled for the warehouse component, which comprises 95% of
the total square footage of the project. To conservatively calculate mobile source emissions, the
CalEEMod 2020.4.0 default trip generation rates were modified to calculate passenger car trips
assuming 1.1 trips/1,000 square feet and truck trips were calculated assuming 0.64 trips/1,000 square
feet as recommended in the South Coast Air Quality Management District Mobile Source Committee.
Warehouse Truck Trip Study Data Results and Usage (July 25, 2014). Thus, daily trips were assumed to
comprise 175 passenger cars/light trucks and 102 truck trips associated with the entire 159,580 square
foot facility. Including the office space as a separate use would remove 8,127 square feet from the
total used to generate passenger care and heavy truck trips. This would have reduced the daily truck
trip number and related heavy truck mobile source emissions by five. This would reduce the overall
mobile source emissions.
However, to determine whether the point raised by the appellant would make a difference in daily
and annual emissions, CalEEMod was revised to reduce the warehouse square footage by 8,127
square feet and add 8,127 square feet of office space. The only change in the area and energy
emissions was a reduction in reactive organic gas emissions associated with energy use. Thus, the
conclusion is energy required to operate the same relative square footage of office space is less than
Page 376
Mr. Vincent Acuna
March 8, 2022
Page 2
BIRDSEYE PLANNING GROUP
1354 York Drive, Vista, CA 92084 | (760) 712-2199 | www.birdseyeplanninggroup.com
that required to operate the same square footage of warehouse space. The methodology used
generated higher overall emissions than modeling the office space as a separate use.
2. Incorrect Application of Area-Related Operational Mitigation Measures
The appellant contends that any changes to model defaults be justified. However as stated in the
comment letter, the “User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data” table fails to provide a
justification for the above changes.
Response. It is true that no notes were included on the architectural coating screens in CalEEMod
2020.4.0 to justify why low VOC coatings were selected for modeling purposes.
However, the reason for doing so is provided on Page 21 of the Air Quality-Greenhouse Gas
Technical Report. Similar to implementation of SCAQMD Rule 403 to control dust during
construction, SCAQMD Rule 1113 requires the use of low-VOC paint (architectural coatings). It is
common methodology to assume 50 g/L for nonflat coatings and 100 g/L for pavement coatings and
we routinely use this approach when working in the South Coast Air Basin. Further, these
assumptions were approved by peer reviewers as part of the technical report preparation process. It is
important to note that compliance with existing rules and regulations is not considered mitigation for
the purpose of CEQA review. However, it is understood that CalEEMod does consider these various
measures control or reduce emissions as mitigation for the purpose of air emission modeling.
CalEEMod was developed by the California Air Resources Board for use statewide as an air emissions
modeling tool. Not all air districts within the state have the same requirements for the use of low
VOC paint and other methods for reducing emissions. Therefore, the default values in CalEEMod can
be modified to reflect conditions imposed by each air district and while these change can be made in
the “mitigation” screen, they are not always considered mitigation as defined under CEQA.
SCAQMD Rule 1113, Table of Standards 1, VOC Limits, shows the current limit for non-flat coatings
is 50 g/Liter of VOC emissions. Further, Traffic Coatings are currently limited to 100 g/Liter of VOC
emissions. Traffic coatings are defined as coatings formulated for or applied to public streets,
highways, and other surfaces including, but not limited to, curbs, berms, driveways, and parking
lots. Should the appellant require additional evidence that in fact low VOC coatings would be
implemented, the project can be conditioned to apply only coatings meeting these emission
requirements.
3. Diesel Particulate Matter Health Risk Emissions Inadequately Evaluated
The appellant states that the DEIR concludes that the Project would have a less-than-significant health
risk impact without conducting a quantified construction or operational health risk analysis.
Response: The appellant states that because the DEIR fails to prepare a quantified construction and
operational HRA, the Project is inconsistent with CEQA’s requirement to correlate the increase in
Page 377
Mr. Vincent Acuna
March 8, 2022
Page 3
BIRDSEYE PLANNING GROUP
1354 York Drive, Vista, CA 92084 | (760) 712-2199 | www.birdseyeplanninggroup.com
emissions that the Project would generate to the adverse impacts on human health caused by those
emissions.
The air quality analysis provides a discussion on the potential for identifiable health impacts that
could result from air pollutants analyzed in environmental documents prepared pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The discussion in Friant Ranch focuses on significant
impacts and the feasibility of directly relating any identified significant adverse air quality impact to
likely health consequences. The Supreme Court opinion in the “Sierra Club v. County of Fresno”,
requires projects with significant air quality impacts to relate the expected adverse air quality impacts
to likely health consequences or explain why it is not feasible at the time of drafting to provide such
an analysis, so that the public may make informed decisions regarding the costs and benefits of the
project.
As stated, the project is located within the SCAB under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. The City of
Rancho Cucamonga defers to threshold guidance established by the SCAQMD and utilizes the
SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook (approved by the AQMD Governing Board in 1993) and
subsequent guidance provided on the SCAQMD website. In addition, when considering potential air
quality impacts under CEQA, consideration is given to the location of sensitive receptors within
proximity to land uses that emit Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs). CARB has published and adopted
the Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (2005), which considers
impacts to sensitive receptors from facilities that emit TAC emissions. CARB has also published
Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High-Volume Roadways: Technical Advisory, a
supplement to the handbook that is intended to provide scientifically based strategies to reduce
exposure to traffic emissions near high-volume roadways to protect public health and promote equity
and environmental justice. The SCAQMD has also adopted land use planning guidelines in the
Guidance Document for Addressing Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Planning (2005).
Together, the documents introduce land use-related policies and strategies that rely on project scope
and location relative to the nearest sensitive properties and traffic (including heavy truck) volumes to
evaluate the potential for health risks.
As stated herein, the proposed project will not exceed the daily emission thresholds established by the
SCAQMD. Thus, for the purpose of this evaluation, potential project impacts have been adequately
evaluated. With respect to DPM emissions, truck operations associated with the project would
generate DPM; however, the site is located along an unrestricted truck route (Milliken Avenue)
within the City of Rancho Cucamonga per Section 10.56.010 of the Municipal Code. The California Air
Resources Board (CARB) Air Quality and Land Use Handbook (2005) recommends avoiding the
siting of new sensitive receptors within 500 feet of an urban roadway with 100,000 vehicles daily.
Traffic counts from 2015 show daily volumes on Milliken Avenue in proximity to Jersey Boulevard
were 30,310. If these volumes are factored up by 2% annually, the 2021 volumes would be
approximately 34,134. This is less than the recommended threshold for siting new sensitive
properties. While the project is not a sensitive use the nearest sensitive use is located approximately
Page 378
Mr. Vincent Acuna
March 8, 2022
Page 4
BIRDSEYE PLANNING GROUP
1354 York Drive, Vista, CA 92084 | (760) 712-2199 | www.birdseyeplanninggroup.com
one-half mile south of the site along Milliken Avenue, and as stated, daily volumes on Milliken
Avenue are and would remain less than the CARB recommended threshold.
Further, both the CARB (Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective,
April 2005) and the SCAQMD analyses indicate that providing a separation of 1,000 feet substantially
reduces DPM concentrations and public exposure downwind of a distribution center, the use closest
to the proposed warehouse project. While these analyses do not provide specific risk estimates for
distribution centers, they provide an indication of the range of risk and the benefits of providing a
separation. Note that CARB recommends a separation of 1,000 feet based on the combination of risk
analysis done for Transport Refrigeration Units (TRUs) associated with distribution centers. The
project will not have on-site refrigeration; and thus, will not have trucks on-site with operating TRUs.
Given the distance between the project site is greater than 1,000 feet, no TRUs would operate on the
site and traffic volumes on Milliken Avenue are lower than the CARB recommendations for siting
new sensitive receptors, project-related truck traffic would not pose a health risk that would justify
further evaluation in a construction or operational health risk assessment.
4. Failure to Adequately Evaluate Greenhouse Gas Impacts
The appellant contends the following:
• The DEIR’s quantitative GHG analysis relies upon an incorrect and unsubstantiated air model;
• The DEIR fails to consider the performance-based standards under CARB’s Scoping Plan; and;
• The DEIR fails to consider the performance-based standards under SCAG’s RTP/SCS.
Response: The reasoning behind the methodology used to model the land uses associated with the
project is described above. The annual GHG emissions (2,410 metric tons of CO2e annually) are
projected to be less than 25% of the annual threshold (10,000 metric tons of CO2e annually). As stated,
the modeling was intended to maximize total mobile source GHG emission estimates. While the
appellant does not identify specific emission sources that were neglected in the modeling, we can
assume that they are referring to energy emissions associated with operation of the office space
relative to the same area of warehouse space. CalEEMod was revised to remove 8,127 square feet of
warehouse space and replace it with the same amount of office space. The modeling results showed
that with the office space, total GHG emissions associated with electrical consumption would increase
by approximately 10 tons annually. This would increase the total annual GHG emissions to 2,420 MT
CO2e. This is conservative as the heavy truck trip volumes were not reduced to reflect the smaller
warehouse square footage. The GHG emissions would remain less than 25% of the annual threshold.
The significance of the impact would not change from what was disclosed in the DEIR.
The appellant further states that the DEIR is insufficient because the project was not compared to the
performance-based standards within CARB’s scoping plan and the SCAG RTP/SCS. As stated in the
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Technical Report, the City of Rancho Cucamonga does not have an
adopted threshold of significance for GHG emissions. Thus, for CEQA purposes, the City has
discretion to select an appropriate significance criterion, based on substantial evidence. The
SCAQMD's adopted numerical threshold of 10,000 MTCO2e/year for industrial stationary source
Page 379
Mr. Vincent Acuna
March 8, 2022
Page 5
BIRDSEYE PLANNING GROUP
1354 York Drive, Vista, CA 92084 | (760) 712-2199 | www.birdseyeplanninggroup.com
emissions is used as the significance criterion in the subject DEIR and other warehouse projects
approved by the City. The consistency analysis is commonly performed by evaluating project
consistency with applicable goals, policies and/or action items in the statewide and regional planning
documents. The DEIR doesn’t provide a performance-based analysis relative to the 2017 CARB
Scoping Plan and RTP/SCS because it isn’t required for the purpose of CEQA compliance.
Should you have questions or would like more information, please contact me via email at
ryan@birdseyeplanninggroup.com or call 760-712-2199.
Regards,
Ryan Birdseye
Principal
Page 380
Resolution No. 2022-035 - Page 1 of 4
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-035
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL
OF AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S
APPROVAL OF DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00766, A REQUEST
TO CONSTRUCT A 159,580 SQUARE-FOOT
INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON A VACANT 7.39-ACRE
PARCEL WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT (IE) DISTRICT
LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF JERSEY
BOULEVARD AND MILLIKEN AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS
IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0229-111-60
A.Recitals.
1.The applicant, 11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC, filed an application for the approval of
Design Review DRC2019-00766 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this
Resolution, the subject Design Review is referred to as "the application."
2.On February 9, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
adopted Resolution No. 22-002 approving the application and making findings in support of its
decision.
3.On February 17, 2022, Lozeau Drury, LLP (“Appellant”), filed a timely appeal of
the Planning Commission’s decision approving the application.
4.On April 20, 2022, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga opened a
duly noticed public hearing on the appeal, conducted the public hearing, concluded the hearing
on that date, and adopted this Resolution denying the appeal and upholding the Planning
Commission’s approval of the application and making findings in support thereof.
5.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 City 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 all available evidence in the record and presented to the City Council
during the above-referenced public hearing on April 20, 2022, including written and oral staff
reports, together with public testimony, the City Council hereby specifically finds as follows:
a.The application applies to property located within the City; and
b.The application applies to an approximately 7.39-acre rectangular piece of
land within the Industrial Employment (IE) District, located at the northwest corner of Jersey
Boulevard and Milliken Avenue; and
Page 381
Resolution No. 2022-035 - Page 2 of 4
c.The land use, General Plan land use designation, and Zoning classification
for the subject property are as follows:
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Vacant Neo Industrial Employment Industrial Employment
(IE) District
North Industrial/Warehouse
Buildings Neo Industrial Employment Neo Industrial (NI)
District
South Fire Station and
Training Center Neo Industrial Employment Industrial Employment
(IE) District
East Industrial/Warehouse
Building Neo Industrial Employment Industrial Employment
(IE) District
West Industrial/Warehouse
Building Neo Industrial Employment Industrial Employment
(IE) District
d.The proposed project consists of the construction of a 159,580 square-foot
warehouse/distribution building and ancillary on-site improvements; and
e.The project complies with all pertinent development standards related to
building height, site coverage, front/rear setbacks, parking; and
f.The project complies with the landscaping requirements as prescribed in
the Development Code.
3.Based upon all available evidence in the record and presented to the City 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.The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan.
The site is located within land designated as Neo Industrial Employment, which permits primarily
light industrial and low impact uses. The project consists of a 159,580 square-foot
warehouse/distribution building surrounded by existing industrial uses. All site improvements,
including parking and landscaped areas, are designed to be consistent with the
warehouse/distribution use and are consistent with the Neo Industrial Employment land use as
designated in the General Plan.
b.The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code
and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The Development Code designates
the project site as an Industrial Employment (IE) District. The proposed warehouse/distribution
building for the site is consistent with the land use intent of the Industrial Employment (IE) District.
The zoning of the adjacent sites to the property are within the Industrial Employment (IE) District
and Neo Industrial (NI) District and consist mainly of industrial buildings. The overall design of the
new building is similar in scale and intensity to neighboring lots. The height of the proposed
building is 45 feet and does not exceed the maximum height allowed for other industrial buildings
Page 382
Resolution No. 2022-035 - Page 3 of 4
in the Industrial Employment (IE) District. The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the entire site at buildout
is 0.5 and will be generally consistent with other industrial properties in the area.
c.The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions
of the Development Code. The building is designed for warehouse/distribution operations. The
building meets all setbacks, floor area ratio, height, and landscaping requirements. The building
has been designed to meet the City’s architectural standards. The project meets the minimum
parking, loading, and access requirements.
d.The proposed use, 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. The site is surrounded by industrial/warehouse facilities of a similar
scale and intensity. Furthermore, the proposed building is substantially surrounded by existing
buildings. Operations on the site are expected to meet all Development Code standards regarding
noise and odor.
4.The Project was environmentally reviewed pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City’s Local CEQA
Guidelines. The City determined that an EIR would be required for the Project, and therefore
prepared an environmental impact report (EIR) that focused on the potentially significant effects
of the Project. By separate Resolution No. 2022-036, and in connection with the City Council’s
upholding of the Planning Commission’s approval of Design Review DRC2019-00766, the City
Council: (i) made the required CEQA findings and determinations, (ii) certified the Final EIR; and
(iii) adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project. Resolution No. 2022-
036 is incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. The
documents and other materials that constitute the record on which this determination was made
are located in the Planning Department and are in the custody of the Planning Director. Further,
the mitigation measures set forth therein are made applicable to the Project.
5.Based upon the findings, evidence, and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2,
3, and 4 above, the City Council hereby denies the appeal of Planning Commission Decision
DRC2019-00766 and upholds the Planning Commission’s decision to approve Design Review
DRC2019-00766 subject to each and every condition set forth in the Conditions of Approval
attached to Planning Commission Resolution No. 22-002.
6.The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Page 383
Resolution No. 2022-035 - Page 4 of 4
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 20 day of April, 2022.
__________________________________
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) ss
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA )
I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular Meeting of said City Council held on
the 20th day of April, 2022.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
Executed this 21st day of April, 2022, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
Nicholas R. Ghirelli, City Attorney
Richards, Watson & Gershon
Page 384
Resolution No. 2022-036 - Page 1 of 7
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-036
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 2021060608)
PREPARED FOR THE 11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC PROJECT
WHICH PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 159,580 SQUARE-
FOOT INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON A
VACANT 7.39-ACRE PARCEL WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL
EMPLOYMENT (IE) DISTRICT, LOCATED AT THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF JERSEY BOULEVARD AND
MILLIKEN AVENUE - APN: 0229-111 -60, MAKING FINDINGS
PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT, AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
A. Recitals.
1. The applicant, 11298 JERSEY BLVD, LLC, filed an application for the
approval of Design Review DRC2019-00766 as described in the title of this Resolution.
Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Design Review is referred to as "the
application."
2. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
the State CEQA Guidelines, the City concluded that there was substantial evidence that
the Project might have a significant environmental impact on several resources and
determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared for the Project
in order to analyze the Project’s potential impacts on the environment.
3. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15082, on June 28, 2021, the City
published a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft EIR for the Project, and circulated the
NOP and initial study to the Office of Planning and Research, the County Clerk,
responsible and trustee agencies, governmental agencies, organizations, and persons
who may be interested in the application for a 30-day public review period.
4. The City received comments from the Native American Heritage
Commission in response to the NOP.
5. After providing notice to the required tribes under Assembly Bill (AB) 52, the
City received comments from the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians and the
Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation in accordance with the City’s obligations
under AB 52.
6. The City released the Draft EIR for a 45-day public review period beginning
November 12, 2021, and ending on December 27, 2021. During the public review period
the City received a total of 2 comment letters on the Draft EIR that required a response,
and the City has prepared responses to each comment.
Page 385
Resolution No. 2022-036 - Page 2 of 7
7. The EIR concludes that with the inclusion of mitigation measures, the
Project will not have a significant impact on any environmental resources.
8. The City prepared a Final EIR in accordance with CEQA, which contains
the City’s responses to comments, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(MMRP) for the Project, the Draft EIR as modified by the Final EIR, and all appendices.
9. On February 9, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga adopted Resolution No. 22-002 approving the application and making
findings in support of its decision.
10. On February 17, 2022, Lozeau Drury, LLP (“Appellant”), filed a timely appeal
of the Planning Commission’s decision approving the application.
11. On April 20, 2022, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
opened a duly noticed public hearing on the appeal, conducted the public hearing,
concluded the hearing on that date, and adopted this Resolution certifying the Final EIR,
making findings pursuant to CEQA, and adopting an MMRP. On that same date, and by
separate Resolution No. 2022-035, the City Council denied the appeal and upheld the
Planning Commission’s approval of the application and made findings in support thereof.
12. 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 City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the
Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Findings. Based upon the information and evidence set forth in the Final
EIR, together with its appendices, and all other available evidence presented to the City
Council during the above-referenced public hearing on April 20, 2022, including written
and oral staff reports and public testimony, the City Council hereby specifically finds as
follows:
a. Agencies and interested members of the public have been afforded
due notice and an opportunity to comment on the EIR and the Project.
b. Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that the City,
before approving the Project, make one or more of the following written findings for each
significant effect identified in the Final EIR accompanied by a brief explanation of the
rationale for each finding:
Page 386
Resolution No. 2022-036 - Page 3 of 7
i. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR;
ii. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and
jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such
changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such
other agency; or
iii. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained
workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the
Final EIR.
These required findings are set forth in the attached Exhibit A and
incorporated herein by this reference.
c. Environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR that are found to be
less than significant and do not require mitigation are described in Section 4 of Exhibit A,
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
d. Environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR as potentially
significant, but that can be reduced to less than significant levels with mitigation, are
described in Section 5 of Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
e. No environmental impacts were identified in the Final EIR as
significant and unavoidable despite the imposition of all feasible mitigation measures, and
a statement further confirming this conclusion is provided in Section 6 of Exhibit A,
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
f. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 and Public Resources Code
Section 21081.6 requires the City to prepare and adopt a mitigation monitoring and
reporting program for any project for which mitigation measures have been imposed to
assure compliance with the adopted mitigation measures. The Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program is attached hereto as Exhibit B and is hereby incorporated herein by
reference. Further, the mitigation measures set forth therein are made applicable to the
Project.
g. Prior to taking action on the Final EIR and approving the Project, the
Planning Commission specifically finds and certifies that: (1) the Final EIR was presented
to the Planning Commission; (2) the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the
Final EIR and all of the information and data in the administrative record, and all oral and
written testimony presented to it during meetings and hearings; (3) the Final EIR is
adequate and has been completed in full compliance with CEQA; and (4) the Final EIR
reflects the Planning Commission’s independent judgment and analysis.
Page 387
Resolution No. 2022-036 - Page 4 of 7
h. No comments or any additional information submitted to the City
have produced any substantial new information requiring additional recirculation or
additional environmental review of the Project under CEQA.
3. Determination. On the basis of the foregoing and all of the evidence in the
administrative record before it, the City Council hereby certifies the Final EIR, adopts
findings pursuant to the CEQA as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference, and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(MMRP) attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference.
4. Location of Record. The documents and other materials, including the staff
reports, technical studies, appendices, plans, and specifications, that constitute the
record on which this Resolution is based are located in the Planning Department and are
in the custody of the Planning Director, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga,
CA 91730. All such documents are incorporated herein by reference.
5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Page 388
Resolution No. 2022-036 - Page 5 of 7
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 20th day of April, 2022.
__________________________________
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) ss
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA )
I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California,
do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted
by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular Meeting of
said City Council held on the 20th day of April, 2022.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
Executed this 21st day of April, 2022, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
__________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
Nicholas R. Ghirelli, City Attorney
Richards, Watson & Gershon
Page 389
Resolution No. 2022-036 - Page 6 of 7
Exhibit A
CEQA Findings and Facts in Support of Findings
Page 390
CANDIDATE FINDINGS OF FACT
for
Jersey Industrial Complex Project
SCH No. 2021060608
Prepared for:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Contact: Vincent Acuna
Prepared by:
Birdseye Planning Group, LLC
P.O. Box 1956, Vista, CA 92085
Contact: Ryan Birdseye
January 2022
Page 391
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 392
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 i
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................1
1.1. Purpose .................................................................................................................. 1
1.2. Records of Proceedings ......................................................................................... 3
1.3. Custodian and Location of Records ....................................................................... 4
1.4. CEQA Findings of Independent Judgment, Review and Analysis ........................... 4
SECTION 2. GENERAL CEQA FINDINGS ..........................................................................................4
SECTION 3. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS DETERMINED TO HAVE NO IMPACT5
3.1. Aesthetics ............................................................................................................... 6
3.2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources ....................................................................... 6
3.3. Biological Resources .............................................................................................. 7
3.4. Cultural Resources ................................................................................................. 9
3.5. Energy .................................................................................................................... 9
3.6. Geology and Soils ................................................................................................... 9
3.7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................................................................... 10
3.8. Hydrology and Water Quality .............................................................................. 12
3.9. Land Use and Planning ......................................................................................... 12
3.10. Mineral Resources ............................................................................................... 13
3.11. Noise .................................................................................................................... 14
3.12. Population and Housing ....................................................................................... 14
3.13. Public Services ..................................................................................................... 14
3.14. Recreation ............................................................................................................ 15
3.15. Transportation/Traffic ......................................................................................... 15
3.16. Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................... 16
3.17. Wildfire ................................................................................................................ 16
SECTION 4. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOUND TO BE LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT (NO MITIGATION REQUIRED) ............................................................... 17
4.1. Aesthetics ............................................................................................................. 17
4.2. Air Quality ............................................................................................................ 18
4.3. Energy .................................................................................................................. 19
Page 393
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 ii
4.4. Geology and Soils ................................................................................................. 19
4.5. Greenhouse Gas Emissions .................................................................................. 21
4.6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................................................................... 21
4.7. Hydrology and Water Quality .............................................................................. 22
4.8. Noise .................................................................................................................... 23
4.9. Public Services ..................................................................................................... 24
4.10. Transportation/Traffic ......................................................................................... 24
4.11. Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................... 25
4.12. Wildfire ................................................................................................................ 26
SECTION 5. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOUND TO BE LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED ..................................................... 27
5.1. Air Quality ............................................................................................................ 27
5.2. Biological Resources ............................................................................................ 29
5.3. Cultural Resources ............................................................................................... 31
5.4. Tribal Cultural Resources ..................................................................................... 33
SECTION 6. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT .......................... 36
6.1. Alternatives Considered and Rejected ................................................................ 36
6.2. Alternative Sites ................................................................................................... 37
6.3. Alternatives Selected for Further Analysis .......................................................... 37
SECTION 7. GENERAL CEQA FINDINGS ........................................................................................ 42
SECTION 8. FINDINGS REGARDING CIRCULATION ........................................................................ 44
SECTION 9. LEGAL EFFECTS OF FINDINGS .................................................................................... 45
Page 394
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 1
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION
This statement of Findings of Fact (Findings) addresses the environmental effects associated
with the proposed Jersey Industrial Complex Project (Project), as described in the Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). These Findings are made pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code [PRC] § 21000 et seq.),
specifically PRC §§ 21081, 21081.5, and 21081.6, and the CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code
of Regulations [CCR] 15000 et seq.), specifically §§ 15091 and 15093. The Draft EIR (DEIR)
examined the full range of potential effects of construction and operation of the Project and
identified standard mitigation practices that could be employed to reduce, minimize, or avoid
those potential effects.
In accordance with, and in furtherance of the mandates contained in California Public Resources
Code Section 21002 and related case law, the Project design reflects the identification and
implementation of feasible mitigation measures to lessen identified environmental impacts, and
the FEIR presented information on the environmental effects of the Project, including effects that
are mitigated to below a level of significance.
1.1. Purpose
PRC § 21081, and CEQA Guidelines § 15091 require that the lead agency, in this case the City
of Rancho Cucamonga (City), prepare written findings for identified significant effects,
accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. PRC § 21081(a) affirmatively
requires a lead agency make one or more of three possible findings in reference to each
significant impact. In addition, PRC § 21081(b) requires an additional finding for impacts that
include specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other considerations wherein the lead
agency affirms that the project benefits outweigh the environmental impacts.
CEQA Guidelines § 15091 states, in part, that:
a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been
certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project
unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those
significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding.
The possible findings are:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified
in the final EIR.
2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been
adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
Page 395
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 2
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make
infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
In accordance with PRC § 21081, and CEQA Guidelines § 15093 (Statement of Overriding
Conditions [SOC]), whenever significant effects cannot be mitigated to below a level of
significance, the decision‐making agency is required to balance, as applicable, the benefits of
the project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the
project. If the benefits of a project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the
adverse effects may be considered “acceptable.” In that case, the decision-making agency may
prepare and adopt an SOC, pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines.
Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines provides:
a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic,
legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its
unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If
the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed
project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse
environmental effects may be considered "acceptable."
b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of
significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or
substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support
its action based on the FEIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of
overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.
c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be
included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice
of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to,
findings required pursuant to Section 15091.
The FEIR identified potentially significant effects that could result from the project. The City finds
that the inclusion of feasible mitigation measures as part of the approval of the Project will reduce
all of those effects to less-than‐significant levels.
As required by CEQA, the City, in adopting these Findings, also adopts a Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Project. The City finds that the MMRP, which is
incorporated by reference and made a part of these Findings, meets the requirements of PRC
§ 21081.6, by providing for the implementation and monitoring of measures intended to mitigate
potentially significant effects of the Project.
In accordance with the CEQA Statutes and Guidelines, the City adopts these Findings for the
Project. Pursuant to PRC § 21082.1(c)(3), the City also finds that these Findings reflect the City’s
Page 396
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 3
independent judgment as the lead agency for the Project (see Findings Section 1.4, CEQA
Findings of Independent Judgment, Review and Analysis).
1.2. Records of Proceedings
For the purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the record of proceedings for the Project includes
all data and materials outlined in PRC § 21167.6(e), along with other Project-relevant information
contained within the City’s files. Specifically, the record of proceedings for the City’s decision on
the Project includes the following documents, all of which are incorporated by reference and are
relied on in supporting these Findings:
• The Notice of Preparation (NOP) and all other public notices issued by the City in
conjunction with the Project.
• All written comments submitted by agencies, organizations, or members of the public
during the public review comment period on the NOP.
• The DEIR for the Project and all technical appendices, technical memoranda and
documents relied upon or incorporated by reference.
• All written comments submitted by agencies, organizations, or members of the public
during the public review comment period on the DEIR and the City’s responses to those
comments, including related referenced technical materials and DEIR errata.
• The FEIR for the Project.
• The MMRP for the Project.
• All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents relating
to the Project prepared by the City or consultants to the City with respect to the City’s
compliance with the requirements of CEQA and with respect to the City’s action on the
Project.
• All documents submitted to the City by other public agencies or members of the public in
connection with the DEIR.
• Any minutes and/or verbatim transcripts of all information sessions, public meetings, and
public hearings held by the City in connection with the Project.
• Any documentary or other evidence submitted to the City at such information sessions,
public meetings, and public hearings.
• All resolutions adopted by the City regarding the Project, and all staff reports, analyses,
and summaries related to the adoption of those resolutions.
• Matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to federal, state, and
local laws and regulations.
• Any documents expressly cited in these Findings, in addition to those cited above, and
any other materials required for the record of proceedings by PRC § 21167.6(e).
Page 397
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 4
1.3. Custodian and Location of Records
The documents and other materials that, as a whole, make up the Record of Proceedings for the
City’s actions related to the Project are located at the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning
Department, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. The City, as the
lead agency for the Project, is the custodian of the Record of Proceedings for the Project.
1.4. CEQA Findings of Independent Judgment, Review and Analysis
Under CEQA, the lead agency must (1) independently review and analyze the EIR; (2) circulate
draft documents that reflect its independent judgment; (3) as part of the certification of an EIR,
find that the report or declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and (4)
submit copies of the documents to the State Clearinghouse if there is state agency involvement
or if the project is of statewide, regional, or area-wide significance (PRC § 21082.1[c]).
The Findings contained in this document reflect the City’s conclusions, as required pursuant to
CEQA, for the Project. The City has exercised independent judgment, in accordance with PRC
§ 21082.1(c)(3), in the preparation of the EIR. The review, analysis and revision material
prepared by the Project Applicant and its consultants, and the review, analysis, and revision of
the EIR based on comments received during the public comment process.
Having received, reviewed, and considered the information in the FEIR, as well as any and all
other information in the record, the City hereby makes these Findings pursuant to and in
accordance with PRC §§ 21081, 21081.5, and 21081.6.
SECTION 2. GENERAL CEQA FINDINGS
Pursuant to PRC § 21081 and CEQA Guidelines § 15091, no public agency shall approve or
carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant
effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out unless the
public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant impact:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which
mitigates or avoid the significant effects on the environment. [referred to in these Findings
as “Finding 1”].
2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency. [referred to
in these Findings as “Finding 2”].
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other consideration, including
considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers,
make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental
impact report. (The concept of infeasibility also encompasses whether a particular
alternative or mitigation measure promotes the Project’s underlying goals and objectives,
Page 398
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 5
and whether an alternative or mitigation measure is impractical or undesirable from a
policy standpoint. See, California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177
Cal. App. 4th 957; City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal. App.3d 410).
[referred to in these Findings as “Finding 3”].
The City has made one or more of the required written findings for each significant impact
associated with the Project. Those written findings, along with a presentation of facts in support
of each of the written findings, are presented below. The City certifies these findings are based
on full appraisal of all viewpoints, including all comments received up to the date of adoption of
these findings, concerning the environmental issues identified and discussed.
The mitigation measures adopted as part of the Project are feasible and mitigate the
environmental impacts to the maximum extent feasible and possible as discussed in the findings
made below. The FEIR includes minor clarifications to the DEIR. These changes made to the
DEIR are shown in the FEIR in response to individual comments and are shown in strikethrough
and underline text.
Thus, it is the finding of the City that such clarifying changes as described in the FEIR, do not
present any new, significant information requiring recirculation or additional environmental review
under PRC § 21092.1 and CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5.
A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MRP for the Project has been adopted pursuant
to the requirements of PRC § 21081.6 to ensure implementation of the adopted mitigation
measures to reduce significant effects on the environment and is included in the FEIR document.
The City is the custodian of the documents and other material that constitute the record of the
proceedings upon which certification of the FEIR for the Project is based, as described above in
Section 1.3, Custodian and Location of Records.
It is the finding of the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s City Council that the FEIR, as presented for
review and approval, fulfills environmental review requirements for the Project, and that the
document constitutes a complete, accurate, adequate, and good faith effort at full disclosure
under CEQA, and reflects the independent judgment of the City.
SECTION 3. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
DETERMINED TO HAVE NO IMPACT
For the following significance thresholds, the City finds that, based upon substantial evidence in
the record, the proposed Project would have no impact; therefore, no mitigation is required, and
no significant, unavoidable adverse impacts would occur.
Page 399
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 6
3.1. Aesthetics
Significance Threshold: Would the project substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings along a scenic highway?
Basis of Conclusion: There are no state or County eligible or designated state scenic highways
in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest officially designated scenic highway is State
Route (SR) 2 (Angeles Crest Scenic Highway), located on the north side of the San Gabriel
Mountains and approximately 12 miles from the northern City boundary. No scenic resources are
located within or adjacent to the project site. Given the distance between the Project Site and the
nearest officially designated state scenic highways, the proposed Project would not substantially
damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway. Therefore, no impacts to scenic resources would be
anticipated.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-4.
3.2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Significance Threshold: Would the project 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?
Basis of Conclusion: According to the California Department of Conservation’s California
Important Farmland Finder, the proposed Project site does not contain Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, or Farmland of Local Importance. The site is
classified as “Urban and Built-Up Land” by the Farmland Finder. The Project site does not contain
Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. No impact to these
resources would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-5 through 5-6.
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use or a Williamson Act contract?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is zoned MI/HI and designated Heavy Industrial in the
General Plan Update (2010). The Heavy Industrial designation permits heavy manufacturing,
compounding, processing or fabrication, warehousing, storage, freight handling, and truck
services and terminals, as well as supportive service commercial uses. This district is intended
for Industrial use. Additionally, the Project site is not enrolled in a Williamson Act contract. As a
Page 400
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 7
result, no impacts related to conflicts with agricultural zoning or a Williamson act contract would
occur. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-6.
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in PRC Section 12220(g))
or timberland (as defined in PRC Section 4526), or timberland
zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
Basis of Conclusion: Neither the Project site nor surrounding areas are zoned for forest use or
timber production. The site has not been used for timber production or commercial agriculture.
The Project would not conflict with any zoning designations designed to preserve timber or
agricultural resources. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-6.
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Basis of Conclusion: There is no forest land on or in the vicinity of the proposed Project site.
The Project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest
use. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-6.
Significance Threshold: Would the project involve other changes in the existing
environment that, due to their location or nature, could
individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland to
nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
Basis of Conclusion: There is no farmland or forest land located within or near the proposed
Project site. The Project would not involve any changes that could result in the loss or conversion
of farmland or forest land to other uses. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-6.
3.3. Biological Resources
Significance Threshold: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
Page 401
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 8
or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site does not support riparian habitat; United States Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), or Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) jurisdictional areas; wetlands; or, sensitive natural
communities. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-7.
Significance Threshold: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state
or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site does not support riparian habitat; non-wetland
jurisdictional resources; wetlands; or, sensitive natural communities. Therefore, no impact would
occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-7.
Significance Threshold: Would the project 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?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is isolated from regional wildlife corridors and linkages,
and there are no riparian corridors, creeks, or useful patches of steppingstone habitat (natural
areas) within or connecting the Project site to any identified wildlife corridors or linkages. No
impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-7.
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site does not contain any trees that would qualify as Heritage
Trees under the City’s Municipal Code and no street trees would be removed during site
preparation. Further, there are no Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community
Conservation Plans that are applicable to the area. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-8.
Page 402
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 9
Significance Threshold: Impact - Would the project conflict with the provisions of an
adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community
conservation plan, or any other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is not within an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan;
Natural Communities Conservation Plan; or other approved local, regional, or State habitat
conservation plan area. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not conflict with the
provisions of an adopted plan and no impacts would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-8.
3.4. Cultural Resources
Significance Threshold: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site has not been developed; thus, there are no structures or
other features that may be determined a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
§15064.5. No recorded resources are located within the area of potential effect (APE). The
Project site is not part of a historic district nor would historic resources be affected by the Project.
No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-53.
3.5. Energy
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-9.
3.6. Geology and Soils
Significance Threshold: Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death from landslides?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site does not exhibit sloped conditions, adverse geologic
conditions, or weak earth materials and is not at risk for seismic induced landslides. The Project
would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of loss, injury, or death involving landslides. No impact would occur.
Page 403
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 10
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-9.
Significance Threshold: Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of
the UBC (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to
life or property?
Basis of Conclusion: As stated in the General Plan EIR, Section 4.7, Geology/Soils, expansive
soils are soils with a significant amount of clay particles that have the ability to shrink or swell
with water. When these soils swell, they exert pressure on building foundations and may cause
damage. Soils in the City of Rancho Cucamonga and its sphere of influence have relatively low
amounts of clay and no soil expansion hazards are present No impact would occur related to
expansive soils.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-64.
Significance Threshold: Would the project have soils that are incapable of supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
Basis of Conclusion: No septic tanks or alternative wastewater systems will be constructed as
part of the proposed Project and no impacts will occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-9.
3.7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Significance Threshold: Would the project be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous material 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?
Basis of Conclusion: Slag fill material was identified on the site that was determined to be
hazardous. The site was remediated consistent with the Phase II Investigation and Remediation
Plan; however, no state or local CUPA oversight occurred. As referenced in the Site Remediation
Report (July 2020), a total of 12,364 tons of hazardous material was removed from the site and
disposed of at the La Paz County landfill, Arizona. Based on the amount of material excavated
and properly disposed of offsite, visual evidence and verification sampling of remaining soils, it
was concluded that constituents within the soil remaining on-site are below the agreed upon
Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) regulatory cleanup levels.
The Project site is not on the Cortese list, nor on databases maintained by either the DTSC or
the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Further, there are no Cortese listed sites
located in proximity to the Project site. The Project is not located on a site included on a list
Page 404
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 11
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. No impact would occur and no
mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-10 through 5-11.
Significance Threshold: Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within ¼ mile of an existing or proposed school?
Basis of Conclusion: No existing or proposed schools are located within one-quarter mile of
the Project site. The nearest school to the Project site is the Rancho Cucamonga Middle School
which is located at 10022 Feron Boulevard in Rancho Cucamonga approximately 2.6 miles west
of the site. Cucamonga Elementary School is located at 8677 Archibald Avenue approximately
2.9 miles west of the site. Accordingly, the Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-10.
Significance Threshold: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project result in
a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project
area?
Basis of Conclusion: Ontario International Airport is located approximately 3.8 miles southwest
of the Project site. The proposed Project is located within the Airport Influence Area and Airport
Land Use Compatibility Zone E as shown in the Ontario Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
(ALUCP) Map 2-. There are no specific land use constraints within Zone E that would apply to
the Project. The proposed Project would not result in a safety concern for people residing in
proximity to Ontario International Airport. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-10.
Significance Threshold: Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
Basis of Conclusion: The proposed Project would not obstruct access to the Project vicinity
through road closures or other project actions that could impact evacuation routes or otherwise
impair evacuation during emergencies. Access to areas surrounding the site via Milliken Avenue
and Jersey Boulevard would be maintained. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-10.
Page 405
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 12
Significance Threshold: Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland
fires?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is not located within a designated fire hazard area or a
Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone within a Local Responsibility Area. The Project would not
expose people or structures to a significant risk associated with wildland fires. No impact would
occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-10.
3.8. Hydrology and Water Quality
Significance Threshold: Would the project, in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is not within a 100-year flood zone, is not within a tsunami
zone, and is not within proximity to an enclosed or partially enclosed body of water that is capable
of producing seiches. Therefore, there would be no impact related to risk of release of pollutants
due to inundation of the Project site from a flood, tsunami or seiche.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-101.
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of
a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is within the Santa Ana River Basin and the Project would
not conflict with the Santa Ana Basin Plan. Additionally, the Project would be consistent with the
City of Rancho Cucamonga MS4 Permit. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-101 through 4-102.
3.9. Land Use and Planning
Significance Threshold: Would the project physically divide an established
community?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is surrounded by warehouse/industrial uses to the north,
east and west and Fire Station #174 and training facility to the south. The proposed Project would
utilize the existing road network and not result in the construction of improvements that would
physically divide an existing community or otherwise impact circulation on public roads
surrounding the site. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-12.
Page 406
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 13
Significance Threshold: Would the project cause a significant environmental impact
due to conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
Basis of Conclusion: Implementation of the Project would not result in conflicts with any local
or regional land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect. The Project is consistent with the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan
(2010) and Zoning Code. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-12 through 5-13.
3.10. Mineral Resources
Significance Threshold: Would the project 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?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is not part of an area known to have significant local
sand and gravel resources. As stated in the General Plan EIR, the mineral resources are primarily
sand and gravel deposits within the alluvial fans in and near Lytle Creek (San Sevaine Wash and
Etiwanda Creek), San Antonio Creek, Cucamonga Creek, Deer Creek, and Day Creek. These
alluvial fans generally start at the canyons at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains, north of the
City. While the northern portion of these fans remain undeveloped, the creeks have been
channelized in and near the City of Rancho Cucamonga and in developed areas along creeks.
Implementation of the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region or to the residents of the State of California. No
impact would result.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-13.
Significance Threshold: Would the project 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?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is not located in an area of known sand and gravel
deposits and is not identified in the General Plan as a locally-important mineral resource recovery
site. Implementation of the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region or to the residents of the State of California. No
impact would result.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-13.
Page 407
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 14
3.11. Noise
Significance Threshold: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or
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?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is located approximately 3.8 miles northwest of Ontario
International Airport. There are no private airstrips in proximity to the site. The proposed Project
is located within the Airport Influence Area and Airport Land Use Compatibility Zone E as shown
in the Ontario ALUCP Map 2-1. No airport noise limits are associated with Zone E. No impact
would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-14.
3.12. Population and Housing
Significance Threshold: Would the project induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new
homes and business) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not construct housing, nor would it extend roads or
other infrastructure into previously unserved areas. Thus, the Project would not directly or
indirectly induce population growth. No impact related to unplanned population growth would
result from Project implementation.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-14.
Significance Threshold: Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Basis of Conclusion: Construction of the proposed Project would not require the removal of
existing housing; and thus, would not result in the displacement of people or require the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-14.
3.13. Public Services
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities or a need for new or physically
Page 408
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 15
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
including other public facilities?
v.) Other Public Facilities:
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not increase the population of Rancho Cucamonga or
otherwise affect demand for library services. No new or expanded library services would be
required. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-16.
3.14. Recreation
Significance Threshold: Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood
and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project does not propose any uses that would directly generate a
population that would increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities. The Project would not add additional residences or business that would
increase demand for any park or other recreational facility in the area. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-16 through 5-17.
Significance Threshold: Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might
have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Basis of Conclusion: No additional park land would be required to accommodate the Project,
nor would staff contribute to an exceedance of the capacity of existing park capacity. The
payment of impact fees by the Project applicant, if required, would contribute to funding available
for improvements to existing park resources. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-17.
3.15. Transportation/Traffic
Significance Threshold: Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Page 409
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 16
Basis of Conclusion: Road improvements would be limited to the driveways on the south and
east side of the Project site and would be constructed consistent with Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Code. The Project would not increase hazards caused by a design feature or
incompatible use. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-17.
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not alter emergency access routes. The road
improvements would be constructed consistent with Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to
ensure safe truck, vendor/employee and emergency vehicle access. The Project would not
impair or otherwise adversely affect emergency vehicle circulation or access to the site or other
properties in the area. No impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-17.
3.16. Utilities and Service Systems
Significance Threshold: Would the project comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and regulations related
to solid waste?
Basis of Conclusion: Construction and operation associated with implementation the Project
would be conducted in compliance with applicable statues and regulations related to solid waste.
No impact would occur and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-20.
3.17. Wildfire
Significance Threshold: Would the project require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks,
emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that
may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or
ongoing impacts to the environment?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is not located within a very high fire hazard severity zone,
and is surrounded by development, with no wildland areas in the immediate vicinity. As such, no
impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-21.
Page 410
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 17
Significance Threshold: Would the project expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or
drainage changes?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site and surrounding area is relatively flat and heavily
urbanized. Additionally, the Project site is not located within a 100-year floodplain. If the area
were to burn, fires are anticipated to be isolated and not expected to result in substantive risk
from landslide or mudflows caused by run-off, post-fire slope instability or drainage changes. No
impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-22.
SECTION 4. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
FOUND TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT (NO
MITIGATION REQUIRED)
The City agrees with the characterization in the Final EIR with respect to impacts identified as
"less than significant impact" and finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, as
discussed below, the following impacts associated with the Project are not significant or are less
than significant, and do not require mitigation, as described in the Final EIR. Under CEQA, no
mitigation measures are required for impacts that are less than significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, § 21002; CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15126.4, subd. (a)(3); 15091.) Note that impacts are
presented below in summary form. For a full description of impacts, see the appropriate text in
the EIR, which the Council hereby incorporates by reference into these Findings.
4.1. Aesthetics
Significance Threshold: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site does not contain scenic resource and would be
consistent with the overall context of the surrounding area. The Project would not have a
substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista, resulting in a less than significant impact.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-2 through 5-4.
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is within an urbanized area of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga. As such, the analysis for this threshold is based on the review of the potential for
Page 411
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 18
the Project to conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. The
Project would not conflict with the applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic
quality, including Rancho Cucamonga Development Code standards and General Plan polices.
A less than significant impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-4 through 5-5.
Significance Threshold: Would the project create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in
the area?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is located in an urban area, which includes existing
sources of light and glare. The Project would add new lighting to the site. All outdoor street
lighting and on-site security lighting and landscape lighting would be designed to City of Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code standards. Impacts would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-5.
4.2. Air Quality
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project area is within the South Coast Air Basin and therefore is
under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The
SCAQMD has two criteria used to determine consistency with the Air Quality Management Plan
(AQMP). The Project would comply with both of the AQMP’s criteria. Therefore, the Project would
be compliant with the applicable AQMP. Impacts would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-19 through 4-20.
Significance Threshold Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not expose sensitive receptors (e.g., residents,
workers or school children) to substantial pollutant concentrations, including localized criteria
pollutant emissions during construction and operation, mobile source and construction-related
diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions, or carbon monoxide (CO) “Hot Spots”. Impacts would
be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-24 through 4-26.
Significance Threshold: Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people?
Page 412
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 19
Basis of Conclusion: The proposed Project would generate odors from construction (i.e., diesel
exhaust, asphalt). Construction emissions would not exceed SCAQMD impact thresholds and
would be short-term in duration. Thus, short-term odors are not expected to be significant.
Operation of the warehouse facility would not cause odors. Impacts would be less than
significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-26.
4.3. Energy
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during
project construction or operation?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would adhere to the state-mandated provisions of California
Energy Code Title 24. The Project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy, or wasteful use of energy resources, during Project construction or
operation. Impacts would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-8 through 5-9.
4.4. Geology and Soils
Significance Threshold: Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving 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 or
strong seismic ground shaking?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is not in a fault hazard area; nor is the Project site within
a mapped Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The Project site is within a seismically active
region. As such, the Project’s proposed structures may be subject to moderate to large seismic
events, resulting in strong seismic ground shaking. The Project would be required to comply with
the California Building Code (CBC) and would be required to incorporate the recommendations
from the Geotechnical Investigation, which would ensure that people and/or structures would not
be exposed to potential substantial adverse effects from strong seismic ground shaking. Impacts
would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-62.
Page 413
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 20
Significance Threshold: Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death from seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
Basis of Conclusion: Groundwater was not encountered during site borings and groundwater
within the Project area is likely of sufficient depth that liquefaction during a seismic event is
unlikely. The potential for encountering groundwater and related impacts associated with
liquefaction at the Project site is considered low. Impacts would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-62 through 4-63.
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss
of topsoil?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is flat, limiting erosion potential. Construction activities
would be conducted in compliance regulations pertaining to protection of water quality. With
adherence to existing regulations and requirements, there would be a less than significant impact
related to erosion during construction and operation.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-63 through 4-64.
Significance Threshold: Would the project 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?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would be required to incorporate the recommendations from
the Geotechnical Investigation, which would ensure that these hazards would be reduced with
proper site preparation. No groundwater was encountered during site borings and groundwater
within the Project area is likely of sufficient depth that liquefaction during a seismic event is
unlikely. Further, the site has dense subsurface soil conditions. Thus, potential impacts related
to land subsidence or lateral spreading would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-64.
Significance Threshold: Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Basis of Conclusion: The majority of the City is underlain by bedrock consisting of surficial
sedimentary or metamorphic rocks that are unlikely to contain significant vertebrate fossils;
however, there may be sedimentary deposits at a greater depth. The Geotechnical Report states
that soils below the site to a depth of 16 feet bgs are comprised of native soil containing alluvial
sand, fine to course-grained, silty, gravelly, dry to damp material. The Project would not excavate
more than approximately four feet below bgs for the building footings, utilities and related
Page 414
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 21
improvements. The surficial sediment at depths that would be encountered by project
excavations are unlikely to contain vertebrate fossils. No paleontological resources were
discovered during remediation activities nor are these resources known to occur in the area,
particularly at depths that would be excavated by the Project. Excavation depths would be limited
to that needed to grade the site and construct building foundations and subsurface utilities and
improvements. Impacts would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-9 through 5-10.
4.5. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Significance Threshold: Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment?
Basis of Conclusion: Construction and operation of the Project, would not exceed the South
Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)/City screening threshold for greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions and would not generate a net increase in GHG emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may significantly impact the environment. GHG emissions impacts would be less
than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-75.
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions
of greenhouse gases?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions, including Senate Bill (SB) 32 and the
California Air Resources Board (CARB) 2017 Scoping Plan, Connect SoCal, and the City of
Rancho Cucamonga Sustainable Community Action Plan. This impact is less than significant
and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-76 through 4-81.
4.6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Significance Threshold: Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
Basis of Conclusion: Construction and operation of the Project would involve handling of
hazardous materials in limited quantities and typical to developed environments. Based on the
site investigation and remediation work performed to date, encountering hazardous materials
during construction is not anticipated. Through compliance with existing applicable regulations,
Page 415
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 22
the Project would not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the
routine transport, use, storage, emission, or disposal of hazardous materials. Impacts would be
less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-87 through 4-88.
Significance Threshold: Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the likely release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would comply with existing applicable regulations and would
not increase the potential for accident conditions which could result in the release of hazardous
materials into the environment. The accidental release of hazardous materials on-site is unlikely
because of the regulations in place to avoid such an event. Impacts are anticipated to be less
than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-88 through 4-89.
4.7. Hydrology and Water Quality
Significance Threshold: Would the project violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground water quality?
Basis of Conclusion: Proposed drainage patterns would maintain the existing drainage pattern
and the Project would be designed to convey surface flows into an underground system where it
would be treated prior to percolation into subsurface soils. The Project would not substantially
degrade water quality or otherwise violate discharge standards. Impacts would be less than
significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-98.
Significance Threshold: Would the project substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site is currently pervious; and post-construction, the majority
of the site would be impervious. However, all stormwater would be retained in an underground
storage infiltration system and allowed to percolate into the soil. The Project would change how
the site percolates water; however, overall recharge volumes within the basin would not change
as a result of the Project. Thus, the Project would not directly interfere with groundwater recharge
or contribute to depletion groundwater. A less than significant impact would occur.
Page 416
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 23
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 4-99.
Significance Threshold: Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?;
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff
in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?;
iii) Create or contribute runoff which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems
or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
or;
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
Basis of Conclusion: With implementation of the stormwater system as designed, no off-site
erosion or siltation would occur. The Project site is not located within a 100-year mapped flood
zone nor is it located in proximity to drainage features that would cause or contribute to flooding
conditions. Thus, the Project would not expose people or structures to flood hazard from severe
storm events. The Project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition
of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off- site, substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would
result in flooding on- or off-site, 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, or impede or redirect flood flows. Impacts would be less than significant and no
mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-99 through 4-101.
4.8. Noise
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in generation of a substantial
temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established
in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not result in the generation of a substantial temporary
or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards
Page 417
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 24
established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies. Noise levels would be below the thresholds of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code
for construction and operations. This impact is less than significant and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-109 through 4-113.
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not result in the generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels during construction or operation. This impact is less than
significant and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-113 through 4-114.
4.9. Public Services
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities or a 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: Fire
Protection, Police Protection, Schools and Parks:
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not involve new residential uses or an increase in the
City’s population, and there is an existing demand for public services at the Project site
associated with the existing development on-site. The Project would be developed in adherence
to existing regulations relative to fire protection and required development impact fees would be
paid. The Project would not increase the population of Rancho Cucamonga or otherwise affect
demand for park facilities. The Project would not remove park or recreational facilities that would
require replacement elsewhere. The Project would not require the construction of new or
alteration of existing public service facilities to maintain an adequate level of service to the Project
area, and no physical environmental impacts would result. Impacts to public services would be
less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-14 through 5-16.
4.10. Transportation/Traffic
Significance Threshold: Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Page 418
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 25
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not be required to make road improvements; however,
frontage and access improvements would be required per the City of Rancho Cucamonga. This
would improve overall pedestrian circulation and safety within the area. The Project would not
conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. This impact is less than significant and no
mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-122 through 4-123.
Significance Threshold Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project’s VMT impact would be considered less than significant based
on the City’s TPA Screening VMT Area screening threshold. The Project site is located within a
TPA is considered less than significant due to meeting each of the criteria for projects within
TPAs. Thus, the Project would not conflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.3, subdivision (b). This impact is less than significant and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-123 through 4-125.
4.11. Utilities and Service Systems
Significance Threshold: Would the project require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment
or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation
of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would create additional demand on existing facilities;
however, demand would be met with existing infrastructure. No additional water or wastewater
treatment facilities would be required to meet Project demand. No additional electrical or
telecommunication systems would need to be constructed to meet Project demand. All waste
material would be collected and disposed of in nearby landfills within permitted capacity. No
additional facilities would need to be constructed to accommodate Project demand. A less than
significant impact would occur.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-17 through 5-19.
Significance Threshold: Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Basis of Conclusion: Development allowed by the Project would require water supplies from
the CVWD. Project demand would be within the demand projections provided in the CVWD
Urban Water Management Plan. Impacts would be less than significant.
Page 419
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 26
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-19.
Significance Threshold: Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider that 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?
Basis of Conclusion: The Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA) wastewater treatment facilities
have sufficient capacity to serve the Project and existing commitments. This impact would be
less than significant and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-19 through 5-20.
Significance Threshold: Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project’s construction and operational refuse would be disposed of
at the Mid Valley Landfill. Construction and operational activities would comply with applicable
regulations addressing solid waste management. The Project would not generate solid waste in
excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise
impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. This impact would be less than significant
and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-20.
Significance Threshold: Would the project comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and regulations related
to solid waste?
Basis of Conclusion: Construction and operation associated with implementation the Project
would be conducted in compliance with applicable statues and regulations related to solid waste.
No impact would occur and no mitigation is required.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 5-20 through 5-21.
4.12. Wildfire
Significance Threshold: Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project would not alter emergency access routes. Emergency vehicle
access to the site would be provided via Milliken Avenue or Jersey Boulevard. The Project would
Page 420
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 27
not adversely impact traffic operations on Milliken Avenue or Jersey Boulevard and would not
impact use of either street as an evacuation route. A less than significant impact would occur
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-21.
Significance Threshold: Would the project, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project is surrounded by warehouse and industrial uses. prevailing
wind is from the west and the Project is located in a flat area. Vegetation in the area is sparse
and there are no areas of native habitat that could burn in the event a wildfire occurs. The Project
site is not expected to be exposed to high-risks resulting from surrounding slopes or prevailing
winds. Impacts would be less than significant.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR page 5-21.
SECTION 5. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
FOUND TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH
MITIGATION INCORPORATED
Pursuant to PRC § 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1), based on substantial
evidence, the City finds that for each of the impacts discussed below the Project’s potentially
significant impacts have been avoided, offset or reduced to less than significant levels in
consideration of existing regulatory plans and programs (described in the DEIR Section 4 for
each applicable impact topic), and EIR mitigation measures (as listed in Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program [MMRP], and summarized below).
5.1. Air Quality
Impact 4.1-2: Would the project violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutants for which the project region
is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?
Basis for Conclusion: The air quality plan applicable to the Project is the SCAQMD‘s Final 2016
Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The Project’s net operational emissions would not exceed
the applicable South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regional or local
significance thresholds or (LST), and the Project’s construction and operational characteristics
Page 421
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 28
would not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP. Additionally, during operation, the Project would
not result in a cumulatively-considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project
region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard, and
impacts would therefore be less than significant.
In terms of project-related construction emissions, the DEIR assumed that graded soils would be
balanced on the Project site and that no soil import or export would be required. The Project would
be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 403, which identifies measures to reduce fugitive dust
and is required to be implemented at all construction sites located within the South Coast Air
Basin. Therefore, the following conditions, which are conditioned as part of the Project to reduce
fugitive dust in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, were included in air quality model
(CalEEMod) for site preparation and grading phases of construction.
1. Minimization of Disturbance. Construction contractors should minimize the area
disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations to prevent
excessive amounts of dust.
2. Soil Treatment. Construction contractors should treat all graded and excavated material,
exposed soil areas, and active portions of the construction site, including unpaved on-site
roadways to minimize fugitive dust. Treatment shall include, but not necessarily be limited
to, periodic watering, application of environmentally safe soil stabilization materials, and/or
roll compaction as appropriate. Watering shall be done as often as necessary, and at least
twice daily, preferably in the late morning and after work is done for the day. The analysis
provided herein assumes watering would occur by contractor two times daily as required
per SCAQMD Rule 403.
3. Soil Stabilization. Construction contractors should monitor all graded and/or excavated
inactive areas of the construction site at least weekly for dust stabilization. Soil stabilization
methods, such as water and roll compaction, and environmentally safe dust control
materials, shall be applied to portions of the construction site that are inactive for over four
days. If no further grading or excavation operations are planned for the area, the area shall
be seeded and watered until landscape growth is evident, or periodically treated with
environmentally safe dust suppressants, to prevent excessive fugitive dust.
4. No Grading During High Winds. Construction contractors should stop all clearing,
grading, earth moving, and excavation operations during periods of high winds (20 miles
per hour or greater, as measured continuously over a one-hour period).
5. Street Sweeping. Construction contractors should sweep all on-site driveways and
adjacent streets and roads at least once per day, preferably at the end of the day, if visible
soil material is carried over to adjacent streets and roads.
Page 422
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 29
Therefore, the Project’s regional air quality impacts (including impacts related to criteria pollutants
and violations of air quality standards) would be less than significant. Nonetheless, prior to
mitigation the Project’s construction-related emissions could exceed the SCAQMD regional
thresholds for ROG. Thus, Project-related construction activities have the potential to result in an
increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to
new violations or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions
reductions specified in the 2016 AQMP, resulting in a potentially significant impact. With the
implementation of MM AQ-1, which includes additional construction-related mitigation
requirements to ensure that the architectural coating phase and the building phase would overlap
for approximately 44 total workdays to avoid exceeding the daily ROG standard.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.1, Air Quality of the DEIR,
which is incorporated herein by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are feasible and are
made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will reduce potentially
significant impacts to less than significant.
MM AQ-1 Condition Project to overlap architectural coating phase with the building phase
by approximately 44 total workdays to avoid exceeding the daily ROG standard. Prior to issuance
of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit a detailed construction schedule to the City of
Rancho Cucamonga which demonstrates that the architectural coating phase will overlap with
the building phase by a minimum of 44 days.
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Findings 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section
15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to
below a level of significance.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-20 through 4-26.
5.2. Biological Resources
Impact 4.2-1: Would the project 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 Wildlife or the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project site consists of undeveloped land that has been impacted by
decades of anthropogenic disturbances. No special-status species were observed on-site during
the habitat assessment. The Project site and surrounding areas provide limited foraging and
nesting habitat for year-round and seasonal birds and migrating songbirds. While it is unknown
Page 423
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 30
whether nesting would occur or what species would nest on-site, if construction activities occur
between February 1 through August 31st, nesting and migratory bird species covered by the
MBTA could be significantly affected by construction activities. Project construction would impact
nesting and migratory bird species covered by the MBTA. Implementation of MM BIO-1, which
requires pre-construction surveys, would reduce impacts to nesting and migratory birds to less
than significant.
Mitigation Measure: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.2, Biological Resources of
the DEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are
feasible and are made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will
reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
MM BIO-1 Pursuant to the MBTA and Fish and Game Code, removal of any trees, shrubs,
or any other potential nesting habitat should be conducted outside the avian nesting season. The
nesting season extends from February 1 through August 31 but can vary slightly from year to
year based upon seasonal weather conditions. If ground disturbance and vegetation removal
cannot occur outside of the nesting season, a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds,
shall be conducted by a qualified biologist at the direction of the Project Applicant and City of
Rancho Cucamonga within three (3) days of the start of any ground disturbing activities to ensure
that no nesting birds will be disturbed during construction.
If an active avian nest is discovered during the pre-construction clearance survey, construction
activities can commence thereafter provided activities are able to maintain a 300-foot buffer
around the active nest. For raptors and special-status species, this buffer will be expanded to
500 feet. A biological monitor shall be present during construction activities within the buffer area.
to delineate the boundaries of the buffers and to monitor the active nest to ensure that nesting
behavior is not adversely affected by the construction activity.
If the biologist determines that bird breeding activity is being disrupted, the Project Applicant shall
stop work, notify the City and coordinate with the USFWS and CDFW to agree upon an
avoidance/minimization approach. Upon agreement of the avoidance/ minimization approach,
work may resume subject to the revisions and continued monitoring.
If burrowing owls are detected on-site during the clearance survey, in conformance with the
California Staff Report’s protocols, no ground-disturbing activities will be permitted within 656
feet of an occupied burrow during the breeding season (February 1 to August 31), unless
otherwise authorized by CDFW.
Once the qualified biologist has determined the young have fledged and left the nest of any birds
within the buffer area(s), or the nest otherwise becomes inactive under natural conditions, normal
construction activities can occur.
Reporting. If no active nests are found during the pre-construction clearance survey, the Project
Applicant shall submit to the City of Rancho Cucamonga a brief letter report prepared by the
Page 424
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 31
biologist that documents the negative survey results. The letter report shall also indicate that no
impacts to active avian nests will occur.
If active nests were found, the Project Applicant shall submit a final bird survey monitoring report
prepared by the Project biologist to the City, the USFWS and CDFW. The report shall include
documentation of all bird surveys, monitoring activities, coordination efforts with the wildlife
agencies, as-built construction drawings with an overlay of any active nests in the survey areas,
photographs of habitat areas during pre-construction and postconstruction conditions, and other
relevant summary information documenting that authorized impacts were not exceeded and that
general compliance was achieved for the avoidance/minimization provisions and the biological
monitoring program required by the wildlife agencies.
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Findings 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section
15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to
below a level of significance.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-37 through 4-39.
5.3. Cultural Resources
Impact 4.3-2: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to
§15064.5?
Basis of Conclusion: The Project has the potential to encounter subsurface archaeological
resources during construction resulting in a potentially significant impact to previously
unrecorded subsurface cultural resources prior to mitigation. Implementation of MM CUL-1 and
MM CUL-2, which identify actions to be taken during construction to protect unknown resources,
would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. MM CUL-1 requires a qualified
archaeologist be retained to evaluate any cultural resources that are discovered during project
activities. In the event that archaeological resources are discovered and avoidance cannot be
ensured, MM CUL-2 requires the qualified archaeologist to develop a Monitoring and Treatment
Plan.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.3, Cultural Resources of
the DEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are
feasible and are made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will
reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
MM CUL-1 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
Page 425
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 32
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 Gabriel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) Cultural Resources
Department shall be contacted, as detailed within TCR-1, regarding any pre-contact and/or
historic-era 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. Prior to the release of the Grading Bond, a Monitoring Report and/or Evaluation
Report, which describes the results, analysis and conclusions of the cultural resource mitigation
monitoring efforts shall be submitted by the qualified archaeologist, along with the Native
American Monitor’s notes and comments, to the City for review and approval.
MM CUL-2 If significant pre-contact and/or historic-era 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.
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Findings 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section
15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to
below a level of significance.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-53 through 4-55.
Impact 4.3-3: Would the project disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Basis of Conclusion: No human remains or cemeteries were identified as a result of the SCCIC
search and pedestrian field survey. The potential for encountering human remains at the Project
site is low, however, there is a potential to encounter subsurface remains during construction.
resulting in a potentially significant impact prior to mitigation. MM CUL-3 identifies actions that
should be taken if human remains are encountered. This measure would reduce impacts to a
less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.3, Cultural Resources of
the DEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following Mitigation Measures are
feasible and are made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation measures will
reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
MM CUL-3 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
Page 426
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 33
§7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the Project. If the human remains are
determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission,
which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant. The Most Likely Descendant shall
complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific
removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native
American burials.
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Findings 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section
15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to
below a level of significance.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-53 through 4-55.
5.4. Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact 4.10-1: 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 cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and
that is:
(i) 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)
(ii) 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 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead
agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a
California Native American Tribe?
Basis of Conclusion: The combined South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), Native
American Heritage Commission (NAHC) sacred land files (SLF) search, and pedestrian
archaeological field survey did not identify any existing historic resources within the proposed
Project area. Further, the Project site has been heavily disturbed by past soil remediation
Page 427
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 34
activities. For this reason, the Project is not anticipated to cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a known historic resource as defined in PRC 5020.1 (k). However, if
construction ground disturbance depths range within native soils (at least 1 foot or more bgs),
there would be a potential to impact previously unrecorded subsurface tribal cultural resources.
Implementation of MM TCR-1 through TCR-6, agreed upon during the City’s consultation with
the California Native American tribes, would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
TCR-1 through TCR-6 require monitoring of ground-disturbing activities, outline the parameters
for the monitoring activities, and identify actions that should be taken if tribal cultural resources
or Native American human remains are encountered. These measures further ensure the proper
identification and subsequent treatment of any tribal cultural resources and/or Native American
human remains that may be encountered during ground-disturbing activities associated with the
development of the Project. These measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant
impact.
Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.10, Tribal Cultural
Resources of the DEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following Mitigation
Measures are feasible and are made binding through the MMRP. Imposition of these mitigation
measures will reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant.
MM TCR-1 The San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) Cultural Resources
Department shall be contacted, as detailed in Mitigation Measure CUL-1, of any pre-contact
and/or historic-era 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 resource Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be created by the
qualified archaeologist in coordination with SMBMI and submitted to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga for review and approval. The qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the Project
Applicant to implement all mitigation measures related to archaeological and historical resources.
All subsequent finds shall be subject to the Monitoring and Treatment Plan. This Plan shall
include tribal contact information, protocol to following should cultural resources be discovered,
curation requirements and allow for a monitor to be present that represents SMBMI for the
remainder of the Project’s ground disturbing activities, should SMBMI elect to place a monitor
on-site.
MM TCR-2 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 the City of Rancho Cucamonga for dissemination to SMBMI. The City of Rancho
Cucamonga and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with SMBMI until all ground disturbing
activities have been completed.
MM TCR-3 The Project Applicant shall be required to retain, prior to the commencement of
construction, and compensate for the services of a Tribal monitor/consultant who is both
approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation Tribal Government and is listed
Page 428
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 35
under the NAHC’s Tribal Contact list for the area of the Project location. This list is provided by
the NAHC. The monitor/consultant will only be present on-site during the construction phases
that involve ground disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined by the
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that may include, but are not limited
to, pavement removal, pot-holing or auguring, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading,
excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the Project area. The Tribal Monitor/consultant will
complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including
construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site monitoring
shall end when the Project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the
Tribal Representatives and monitor/consultant have indicated that the site has a low potential for
impacting Tribal Cultural Resources.
MM TCR-4 Upon discovery of any archaeological resources, cease construction activities in
the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can be assessed by the qualified archaeologist
and/or Native American monitor. All archaeological resources unearthed by project construction
activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and tribal monitor/consultant approved
by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation. If the resources are Native American in
origin, the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation shall coordinate with the landowner
regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, the Tribe will request reburial or
preservation for educational purposes. Work may continue on other parts of the Project while
evaluation and, if necessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 [f]). If a
resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a “historical resource” or
“unique archaeological resource”, time allotment and funding sufficient to allow for
implementation of avoidance measures, or appropriate mitigation, must be available. The
treatment plan established for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.5(f) for historical resources.
MM TCR-5 Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment. If
preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological
data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing
and analysis. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be
curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the
Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution
agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be
offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.
MM TCR-6 Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an
inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary
objects, called associated grave goods in PRC 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this
statute. Health and Safety Code 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material
shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and excavation halted until the coroner has
determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those
of a Native American or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or
Page 429
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 36
she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission
(NAHC) and PRC 5097.98 shall be followed.
Finding: The City adopts CEQA Findings 1.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section
15091(a), the City hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effect on the environment to
below a level of significance.
Supportive Evidence: Please refer to DEIR pages 4-130 through 4-133.
SECTION 6. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES TO THE
PROPOSED PROJECT
CEQA requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the
location of the project, that could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project, and to evaluate
the comparative merits of the alternatives (14 CCR 15126.6[a]). The CEQA Guidelines direct that
the selection of alternatives be governed by “a rule of reason” (14 CCR 15126.6[a], [f]). As
defined by the CEQA Guidelines, “The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by a
‘rule of reason’ that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a
reasoned choice. The alternatives shall be limited to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen
any of the significant effects of the project. Of those alternatives, the EIR needs to examine in
detail only the ones that the Lead Agency determines could feasibly attain most of the basic
objectives of the project” (14 CCR 15126.6[f]). The Project objectives are set forth in DEIR
Section 6.2.
6.1. Alternatives Considered and Rejected
The CEQA Guidelines provide that this EIR should “identify any alternatives that were considered
by the Lead Agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process and briefly explain
the reasons underlying the Lead Agency’s determination” (14 CCR 15126.6[c]). The following is
a discussion of the proposed project alternatives developed during the scoping and planning
process and the reasons they were not selected for detailed analysis in this EIR.
With respect to the feasibility of potential alternatives to the proposed project, CEQA Guidelines
§ 15126.6(t)(l) states, “Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the
feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure,
general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries . . . and
whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the
alternative site.”
In determining an appropriate range of project alternatives to be evaluated in this EIR, a number
of possible alternatives were initially considered and then rejected. Project alternatives were
Page 430
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 37
rejected because they could not accomplish the basic objectives of the proposed Project; they
would not have resulted in a reduction of significant adverse environmental impacts; or they were
considered infeasible to construct or operate.
The following alternative has been rejected from further consideration:
6.2. Alternative Sites
In the case of the Project, an alternative site is not considered applicable or feasible, as the
Project Applicant does not own or control other undeveloped property of similar size and zoning
within the City or in the immediate area. Further, construction of a project different in scope from
the proposed Project would not meet the objectives that focus on development of warehousing
facilities within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. For the above reasons, the Alternative Site
Alternative was found to be infeasible and therefore was rejected from further consideration.
6.3. Alternatives Selected for Further Analysis
The following alternatives were addressed in the DEIR:
• The No Project Alternative
• The Reduced Footprint Alternative
No Project Alternative
Consistent with CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6(e)(3)(b)), the No Project Alternative is
defined as the “circumstance under which the project does not proceed.” Section 15126.6(e) of
the CEQA Guidelines requires analysis of a No Project alternative that (1) discusses existing site
conditions at the time the NOP is prepared or the EIR is commenced, and (2) analyzes what can
reasonably be expected to occur in the foreseeable future based on current plans if the proposed
Project were not approved. Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Project would not be
implemented and the site would remain undeveloped.
Findings Regarding Environmental Impacts
The Project would not result in any significant and unavoidable impacts; therefore, the No Project
Alternative would not avoid or substantially lessen a significant and unavoidable impact. However,
the No Project Alternative would avoid the Project’s less than significant impacts.
Findings Regarding Project Objectives
The No Project Alternative would not meet any of the Project objectives, would not realize any of
the Project’s benefits resulting from the creation of employment opportunities in the City of
Rancho Cucamonga to reduce the need for members of the local workforce to commute outside
the area for employment and improve the jobs to housing balance.
Page 431
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 38
Overall Finding: The City adopts Finding 3.
The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make
this alternative infeasible. Although the No Project Alternative would avoid the Project’s less than
significant environmental impacts, this alternative would not meet any of the Project’s objectives.
Supporting Evidence: Please see DEIR Pages 6-4 through 6-5.
Reduced Footprint Alternative
Under this alternative, the proposed Project would be reduced by approximately 2/3 of the overall
square footage of each component. The warehouse would be reduced to 93,389 square feet in
four separate units, 5,364 square feet of mezzanine storage, 5,364 square feet of office space
(i.e., divided into four separate spaces, one for each storage unit) and a 203-square foot electrical
room. The total building area would be 104,320 square feet. The highest point of the building
would be 42 feet above ground level. These would be the architectural parapets on the building
frontage. A total of 73 parking spaces would be provided. The warehouse building would be
oriented east/west with vehicle access to office space fronting the building from Jersey
Boulevard. Truck access to the loading docks located at the rear of the building would be
provided from Milliken Avenue. The truck access driveway would be gated with security cameras
and monitored to ensure no unauthorized entrance to the loading area. The Reduced Footprint
Alternative would provide four warehouse storage units, each with three truck loading docks (i.e.,
12 total docks). Water/sewer and other utilities (i.e., electrical, communication) would be provided
via existing infrastructure located on-site or within the adjacent Milliken Avenue and Jersey
Boulevard corridors. All other features of the Reduced Footprint Alternative would be similar to
the proposed Project.
Findings Regarding Environmental Impacts
The Project would not result in any significant and unavoidable impacts; therefore, the Reduced
Footprint Alternative would not avoid or substantially lessen a significant and unavoidable impact.
Project-level mitigation measures are required to reduce potentially significant impacts to levels
considered less than significant for the following environmental resources: biological resources
(due to potential presence of Cooper’s Hawk, California horned lark, burrowing owl and other
nesting bird species), cultural resources (due to the potential to encounter previously unrecorded
subsurface cultural resources), and tribal cultural resources (due to the potential to encounter
previously unknown tribal cultural resources). These potentially significant impacts are
associated with construction activities, not operation of the Project.
Both the Project and the Reduced Footprint Alternative would be required to comply with
applicable regulations and would also implement the same mitigation measures required for the
Project. The Reduced Project Alternative would disturb the same area as the proposed Project;
however, the overall building footprint would be smaller. This would reduce the number of
vehicles and trucks accessing the Project site daily. However, while the degree of impact would
be incrementally less than the proposed Project for some issue areas, the impact determination
Page 432
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 39
under the proposed Project would be similar to the proposed Project for all topical areas
addressed in the Draft EIR.
Findings Regarding Project Objectives
The discussion below addresses the ability of the Reduced Footprint Alternative to attain the
Project objectives.
4. Ensure that development of the Project site is accomplished consistent with
applicable goals and policies of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as set forth in
the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The Reduced Footprint Alternative would
disturb the same area as the proposed Project; however the overall building footprint
would be smaller and would not develop the site at density envisioned in the Rancho
Cucamonga General Plan. Therefore, while the Reduced Footprint Alternative meets
the intent of this Project objective, it does not meet it to the same extent as the Project.
5. Develop a vacant and underutilized Project site. The Reduced Footprint Alternative
would develop industrial/warehouse use on the Project site; however it would not
maximize development of the underutilized Project site. While the Reduced Footprint
Alternative meets the intent of this Project objective, it does not meet it to the same
extent as the Project.
6. Contribute to the warehousing resources in the City of Rancho Cucamonga by
constructing an operating a facility this designed consistent with contemporary
industry standards for operational design criteria, can accommodate a wide
variety of users and are economically competitive with similar industrial
buildings in the local area and region. The Reduced Footprint Alternative would
develop industrial/warehouse use on the Project site, thereby meeting the intent of the
Project objective. However, because a smaller warehouse building would be
constructed, compared to the proposed Project, the Reduced Footprint Alternative
does not meet this objective to the same extent as the Project.
7. Create employment opportunities in the City of Rancho Cucamonga to reduce
the need for members of the local workforce to commute outside the area for
employment and improve the jobs to housing balance. The Reduced Footprint
Alternative would generate more employment opportunities than what would be
generated by a vacant lot; however, it would not achieve this objective to the same
extent as the Project.
8. To develop a project with an architectural design and operational characteristics
that complement other existing buildings in the immediate vicinity and minimize
conflicts with other nearby land uses. The Reduced Footprint Alternative would not
conflict with existing architecture or the operations of nearby uses and would achieve
this objective.
9. To maximize industrial warehouse buildings in close proximity to an already-
established industrial area, designated truck routes, and the State highway
Page 433
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 40
system in order to avoid or shorten truck-trip lengths on other roadways, and
avoid locating industrial warehouse buildings in close proximity to residential
uses. The Reduced Footprint Alternative would develop a smaller warehouse facility,
compared to the proposed Project and would not maximize the amount of available
industrial warehouse space, and therefore, would not meet this Project objective.
10. To develop a property that has access to available infrastructure, including
roads and utilities to be used as part of the Southern California supply chain
and goods movement network. The Reduced Footprint Alternative would develop
industrial/warehouse use on the Project site that would utilize available infrastructure
used as part of the Southern California supply chain and goods movement network.
The Reduced Footprint Alternative would meet the intent of this objective, but not to
the same extent as the Project relative to supporting goods movement in Southern
California.
Overall Finding: The City adopts Finding 3.
The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make
this alternative infeasible. Although the No Project Alternative would avoid the Project’s less than
significant environmental impacts, this alternative would not meet any of the Project’s objectives.
Supporting Evidence: Please see DEIR Pages 6-6 through 6-8.
Environmentally Superior Alternative
Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an environmentally superior
alternative be designated and states that if the environmentally superior Alternative is the No
Project Alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the
other alternatives. Based on the summary of information presented in Section 6 of the DEIR, the
environmentally superior Alternative is The No Project Alternative. Because the No Project
Alternative would leave the Project site essentially unchanged and would not have the
operational effects that would be associated with any of the alternatives, this Alternative has
fewer environmental impacts than the proposed Project or any of the other alternatives.
Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines states that if the “No Project” alternative is
found to be environmentally superior, “the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior
alternative among the other alternatives.” Aside from the No Project Alternative, Alternative 2:
Reduced Footprint Alternative would have the least environmental impacts because it would
develop less of the Project area, result in a reduction of vehicle trips and would incrementally
reduce impacts to resource areas.
CEQA requires the identification of an environmentally superior alternative. As discussed above,
the No Project/No Action Alternative, in which the proposed Project is not implemented, would
result in no change from current conditions. However, Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the CEQA
Guidelines states that, if the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative,
Page 434
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 41
then the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other
alternatives.
Additional CEQA Considerations
Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts (DEIR Section 5.2)
The potentially adverse effects of the proposed Project are discussed in Sections 4.1 through
4.10 of DEIR. Mitigation measures have been recommended that would avoid, reduce or
minimize impacts. All the potential impacts associated with the proposed Project would be either
less than significant or mitigated to less than significant. The proposed Project would not result
in any significant unavoidable impacts.
Irreversible Environmental Changes (DEIR Section 5.3)
Both construction and operation of the proposed Project would lead to the consumption of limited,
slowly renewable, and non-renewable resources, committing such resources to uses that future
generations would be unable to reverse. The new development would require the commitment
of resources that include: (1) building materials; (2) fuel and operational materials/resources; and
(3) the transportation of goods and people to and from the new warehouse.
Title 24 of the California Administrative Code regulates the amount of energy consumed by new
development. Nevertheless, the consumption of such resources would represent a long-term
commitment of those resources. The commitment of resources required for the construction and
operation of the proposed Project would limit the availability of such resources for future
generations or for other uses during the life of the proposed Project. However, continued use of
such resources is consistent with the planned changes on the proposed Project site and within
the general vicinity.
Growth Inducing Impacts (DEIR Section 5.4)
The proposed Project would not directly induce growth as it does not involve residential
development. The proposed Project site has been designated for industrial/warehousing uses as
identified in the City’s adopted General Plan. In addition, the proposed Project would not remove
obstacles to regional growth and related development.
The Project will generate approximately 111 new jobs. Of the total, approximately 86 percent, or
95 jobs, will be filled by employees residing outside the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The
remaining 16 jobs will be filled by existing city residents. The addition of 111 new jobs would
represent a 0.12 percent increase in total employment. The proposed Project may result in
negligible population growth; however, the area is primarily built out. Any new residents would
be expected to occupy existing housing units or those in the planning stage. Any new residents
would not represent unplanned population growth in the community or result in economic growth
that exceeds levels anticipated in plans adopted by the City. Therefore, no significant impacts
related to growth inducement would occur.
Page 435
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 42
Although the proposed Project site is currently undeveloped, the surrounding area is fully
developed with urban land uses (i.e., warehousing and light industrial). The Project would include
connections to existing utilities and installation of on-site stormwater management
improvements. Utilities and streets would not need to be extended to the Project site. The
addition of 111 new jobs, would not induce growth associated with the construction of new house
or commercial infrastructure to support the jobs. No significant impacts related to direct growth
inducement would occur.
SECTION 7. GENERAL CEQA FINDINGS
The City hereby finds as follows:
1. The foregoing statements are true and correct;
2. The City is the “Lead Agency” for the Project evaluated in the CEQA Documents and
independently reviewed and analyzed in the DEIR and FEIR for the Project;
3. The Notice of Preparation of the DEIR was circulated for public review. It requested
that responsible agencies respond as to the scope and content of the environmental
information germane to that agency’s specific responsibilities;
4. The public review period for the DEIR was for 30 days between July 2,2021 and
August 3, 2021. The DEIR and appendices were available for public review during that
time. A Notice of Completion and copies of the DEIR were sent to the State
Clearinghouse, and notices of availability of the DEIR were published by the City. The
DEIR was available for review on the City’s website. Physical copies of the
environmental documents are available at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Department.
5. The CEQA Documents were completed in compliance with CEQA;
6. The CEQA Documents reflect the City’s independent judgment;
7. The City evaluated comments on environmental issues received from persons who
reviewed the DEIR. In accordance with CEQA, the City prepared written responses
describing the disposition of significant environmental issues raised. The FEIR
provided adequate, good faith and reasoned responses to the comments. The City
reviewed the comments received and responses thereto and has determined that
neither the comments received nor the responses to such comments add significant
new information to the DEIR regarding adverse environmental impacts. The City has
based its actions on full appraisal of all viewpoints, including all comments received
up to the date of adoption of these Findings, concerning the environmental impacts
identified and analyzed in the FEIR.
8. The City finds that the CEQA Documents, as amended, provide objective information
to assist the decision-makers and the public at large in their consideration of the
environmental consequences of the Project. The public review period provided all
Page 436
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 43
interested jurisdictions, agencies, private organizations, and individuals the
opportunity to submit all comments made during the public review period;
9. The CEQA Documents evaluated the following impacts: (1) air quality; (2) biological
resources; (3) cultural resources; (4) geology and soils; (5) greenhouse gas emissions;
(6) hazards and hazardous materials; (7) hydrology and water quality; (8) noise; (9)
transportation; and (10) tribal cultural resources. Additionally, the CEQA Documents
considered, in separate sections, any potential significant irreversible environmental
changes and growth-inducing impacts of the Project, as well as effects found not to be
significant and a reasonable range of project alternatives. All of the significant
environmental impacts of the Project were identified in the CEQA Documents;
10. The MMRP includes all of the mitigation measures identified in the CEQA Documents
and has been designed to ensure compliance during implementation of the Project.
The MMRP provides the steps necessary to ensure that the mitigation measures are
fully enforceable;
11. The MMRP designates responsibility and anticipated timing for the implementation of
mitigation; the City’s Community Development Director will serve as the MMRP
Coordinator;
12. In determining whether the Project may have a significant impact on the environment,
and in adopting these Findings pursuant to Section 21081 of CEQA, the City has
complied with CEQA Sections 21081.5 and 21082.2;
13. The impacts of the Project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time of
certification of the CEQA Documents;
14. The City made no decisions related to approval of the Project prior to the initial
recommendation of certification of the CEQA Documents. The City also did not commit
to a definite course of action with respect to the Project prior to the initial consideration
of the CEQA Documents.
15. Copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the CEQA Documents are
and have been available upon request at all times at the offices of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Department, the custodian of record for such documents or
other materials;
16. The responses to the comments on the DEIR, which are contained in the FEIR, clarify
and amplify the analysis in the DEIR;
17. Having reviewed the information contained in the CEQA Documents and in the
administrative record, the City finds that there is no new significant information
regarding adverse environmental impacts of the Project in the FEIR; and
18. Having received, reviewed and considered all information and documents in the CEQA
Documents, as well as all other information in the record of proceedings on this matter,
these Findings are hereby adopted by the City in its capacity as the CEQA Lead
Agency.
Page 437
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 44
SECTION 8. FINDINGS REGARDING CIRCULATION
The City finds that the DEIR does not require recirculation under CEQA (PRC § 21092.1 and
CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5). CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5 requires recirculation of an EIR prior
to certification of the FEIR when “significant new information is added to the EIR after public
notice is given of the availability of the draft EIR for public review.” As described in CEQA
Guidelines § 15088.5:
New information added to an EIR is not “significant” unless the EIR is changed in a way that
deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse
environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including
a feasible project alternative) that the project’s proponents have declined to implement.
“Significant new information” requiring recirculation includes, for example, a disclosure showing
that:
1. A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new
mitigation measure proposed to be implemented;
2. A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless
mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance;
3. A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others
previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the
project, but the project’s proponents decline to adopt it;
4. The DEIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature
that meaningful public review and comment were precluded.
In addition, CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5(b) provides that “recirculation is not required where the
new information added to the EIR merely clarifies and amplifies or makes insignificant
modifications in an adequate EIR.” Recirculation also is not required simply because new
information is added to the EIR — indeed, new information is oftentimes added given CEQA’s
public/agency comment and response process and CEQA’s post-DEIR circulation requirement
of proposed responses to comments submitted by public agencies. In short, recirculation is
“intended to be an exception rather than the general rule.” (Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v.
Regents of University of California (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1112, 1132).
As such, the City makes the following Findings:
1. None of the public comments submitted to the City regarding the DEIR present any
significant new information that would require the DEIR to be recirculated for public
review.
2. No new or modified mitigation measures are proposed that would have the potential
to create new significant environmental impacts
Page 438
FINDINGS OF FACT
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 45
3. The DEIR adequately analyzed project alternatives and there are no feasible project
alternatives or mitigation measures considerably different from others previously
analyzed that would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project.
4. The DEIR was not fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature
and did not preclude meaningful public review and comment.
In this legal context, the City finds that recirculation of the DEIR prior to certification is not
required. In addition to providing responses to comments, the FEIR includes revisions to expand
upon information presented in the DEIR; explain or enhance the evidentiary basis for the DEIR’s
findings; update information; and to make clarifications, amplifications, updates, or helpful
revisions to the DEIR. The FEIR’s revisions, clarifications and/or updates do not result in any
new significant impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact.
In sum, the FEIR demonstrates that the proposed Project would not result in any new significant
impacts or increase the severity of a significant impact, as compared to the analysis presented
in the DEIR. The changes reflected in the FEIR also do not indicate that meaningful public review
of the DEIR was precluded in the first instance. Accordingly, recirculation of the EIR is not
required as revisions to the EIR are not significant as defined in § 15088.5 of the CEQA
Guidelines.
SECTION 9. LEGAL EFFECTS OF FINDINGS
To the extent that these Findings conclude that the proposed mitigation measures outlined in
herein are feasible and have not been modified, superseded, or withdrawn, the City hereby
commits to implementing these measures. These Findings, in other words, are not merely
informational, but rather constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the
City approves the proposed Project.
The mitigation measures that are referenced herein and adopted concurrently with these
Findings will be effectuated through the process of construction and implementation of the
proposed Project.
Page 439
Resolution No. 2022-036 - Page 7 of 7
Exhibit B
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Page 440
FINAL
Jersey Industrial Complex Project
Environmental Impact Report
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCH No. 2021060608
Prepared for:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Contact: Vincent Acuna
Prepared by:
Birdseye Planning Group, LLC
P.O.Box 1956, Vista, CA 92085
Contact: Ryan Birdseye
January 2022
Page 441
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 442
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
SECTION 1. Authority ................................................................................................................. 1
SECTION 2. Monitoring Schedule ............................................................................................. 1
SECTION 3. Support Documentation ........................................................................................ 2
SECTION 4. Format of Mitigation Monitoring Matrix ............................................................... 2
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ................................................. 3
Page 443
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Findings of Fact
January 2022 ii
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 444
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
SECTION 1. Authority
This environmental Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Program) has been prepared
pursuant to §21081.6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code
§21000 et seq.), and CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. §15000 et seq.) §§15091(d) and
15097, to ensure implementation of and provide for the monitoring of mitigation measures
required of the Jersey Industrial Complex Project (Project), as set forth in the Final Environmental
Impact Report (FEIR) prepared for the Project. This report will be kept on file in the offices of the
CEQA Lead Agency, the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City).
The EIR addresses the potential environmental impacts of the Project, and, where appropriate,
recommends mitigation measures to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental
impacts. The Program detailed in the matrix table below is designed to monitor and ensure
implementation of all mitigation measures that are adopted for the Project.
The City is the Lead Agency for the Project and assumes ultimate enforcement responsibilities
for implementation of all mitigation measures listed in this Program. The City may assign
responsibility for implementation or monitoring to appropriate designees such as a construction
manager or third-party monitor. However, as the Lead Agency, the City remains responsible for
ensuring that implementation of the mitigation measures occurs in accordance with this Program.
In some cases, the City is required to secure permits or approvals from third-party agencies in
order to implement a mitigation measure. In these cases, the City is responsible for verifying that
such permits or approvals have been obtained in accordance with the conditions stipulated in the
mitigation measure. The City’s existing planning, engineering, operations, and procurement
review and inspection processes will be used as the basic foundation for the Program procedures
and will also serve to provide the documentation for the reporting program.
SECTION 2. Monitoring Schedule
Prior to construction, while detailed design plans are being prepared by City staff or its agents,
City staff will be responsible for ensuring compliance with mitigation monitoring applicable to the
Project construction, development, and design phases. Once construction has begun and is
underway, monitoring of the mitigation measures associated with construction will be included in
the responsibilities of City staff, who shall prepare or cause to be prepared periodic monitoring
reports, as appropriate. Regulatory agencies will have to harmonize CEQA mitigation with
regulatory permit conditions and monitoring/reporting as part of the regulatory permitting process
and will likely require submittal of formal monitoring reports. Once construction has been
completed, the City will monitor the Project as specified in the mitigation measures.
Page 445
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 2
SECTION 3. Support Documentation
Findings and related documentation supporting the findings involving modifications to mitigation
measures shall be maintained in the Project file with the Program and shall be made available to
the public upon request.
SECTION 4. Format of Mitigation Monitoring Matrix
The mitigation monitoring matrix on the following pages identifies the environmental issue areas
for which monitoring is required, the required mitigation measures, the time frame for monitoring,
and the responsible implementing and monitoring agencies.
Page 446
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 3
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
AIR QUALITY
AQ-1: Condition project to overlap architectural coating phase with the
building phase by approximately 44 total workdays to avoid exceeding the
daily ROG standard. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant
shall submit a detailed construction schedule to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga which demonstrates that the architectural coating phase will
overlap with the building phase by a minimum of 44 days.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to issuance of
building permits
Plan check
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
BIO-1: Pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and Fish and
Game Code, removal of any trees, shrubs, or any other potential nesting
habitat should be conducted outside the avian nesting season. The nesting
season extends from February 1 through August 31 but can vary slightly
from year to year based upon seasonal weather conditions. If ground
disturbance and vegetation removal cannot occur outside of the nesting
season, a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds, shall be
conducted by a qualified biologist within three (3) days of the start of any
ground disturbing activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed
during construction.
If an active avian nest is discovered during the pre-construction clearance
survey, construction activities can commence thereafter provided activities
are able to maintain a 300-foot buffer around the active nest. For raptors
and special-status species, this buffer will be expanded to 500 feet. A
biological monitor shall be present during construction activities within the
buffer area. to delineate the boundaries of the buffers and to monitor the
active nest to ensure that nesting behavior is not adversely affected by the
construction activity.
If the biologist determines that bird breeding activity is being disrupted, the
Project Applicant shall stop work, notify the City and coordinate with the
USFWS and CDFW to agree upon an avoidance/minimization approach.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to grading
permit and/or
construction permit
issuance; during
grading, excavation
and construction
activities, upon
completion of
monitoring
activities, and prior
to final engineering
inspection.
On-site inspection,
separate submittal
Page 447
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 4
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
Upon agreement of the avoidance/ minimization approach, work may
resume subject to the revisions and continued monitoring.
If burrowing owls are detected on-site during the clearance survey, in
conformance with the California Staff Report’s protocols, no ground-
disturbing activities will be permitted within 656 feet of an occupied burrow
during the breeding season (February 1 to August 31), unless otherwise
authorized by CDFW.
Once the qualified biologist has determined the young have fledged and left
the nest of any birds within the buffer area(s), or the nest otherwise
becomes inactive under natural conditions, normal construction activities
can occur.
Reporting. If no active nests are found during the pre-construction
clearance survey, the Project Applicant shall submit to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga a brief letter report prepared by the biologist that documents
the negative survey results. The letter report shall also indicate that no
impacts to active avian nests will occur.
If active nests were found, the Project Applicant shall submit a final bird
survey monitoring report prepared by the project biologist to the City, the
USFWS and CDFW. The report shall include documentation of all bird
surveys, monitoring activities, coordination efforts with the wildlife agencies,
as-built construction drawings with an overlay of any active nests in the
survey areas, photographs of habitat areas during pre-construction and
post-construction conditions, and other relevant summary information
documenting that authorized impacts were not exceeded and that general
compliance was achieved for the avoidance/minimization provisions and the
biological monitoring program required by the wildlife agencies.
Page 448
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 5
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
CULTURAL RESOURCES
CUL-1: 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 SMBMI Cultural Resources
Department shall be contacted, as detailed within TCR-1, regarding any
pre-contact and/or historic-era 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.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to issuance of
grading
permit/during
grading and
construction
Plan check,
separate submittal
CUL-2: If significant pre-contact and/or historic-era 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.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
During grading and
construction
On-site inspection,
separate submittal
CUL-3: 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. If the human remains are
determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the Native American
Heritage Commission, which will determine and notify a Most Likely
Descendant. The Most Likely Descendant shall complete the inspection of
the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific
removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items
associated with Native American burials.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to issuance of
grading
permit/during
grading and
construction
Plan check,
separate submittal
Page 449
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 6
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
TCR-1: The SMBMI Cultural Resources Department shall be contacted, as
detailed in Mitigation Measure CUL-1, of any pre-contact and/or historic-era
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 resource
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.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to issuance of
grading
permit/during
grading and
construction
Plan check,
separate submittal
TCR-2: 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.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
During grading and
construction
Separate submittal
TCR-3: The Project Applicant shall be required to retain and compensate
for the services of a Tribal monitor/consultant who is both approved by the
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation Tribal Government and is
listed under the NAHC’s Tribal Contact list for the area of the Project
location. This list is provided by the NAHC. The monitor/consultant will only
be present on-site during the construction phases that involve ground
disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined by the
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that may
include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, pot-holing or auguring,
grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching,
within the Project area. The Tribal Monitor/consultant will complete daily
monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including
construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified.
The on-site monitoring shall end when the Project site grading and
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to issuance of
grading
permit/during
grading and
construction
On-site inspection,
other agency
permit/approval
Page 450
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 7
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and
monitor/consultant have indicated that the site has a low potential for
impacting Tribal Cultural Resources.
TCR-4: Upon discovery of any archaeological resources, cease
construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can
be assessed. All archaeological resources unearthed by project
construction activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and
tribal monitor/consultant approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission
Indians-Kizh Nation. If the resources are Native American in origin, the
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation shall coordinate with the
landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically,
the Tribe will request reburial or preservation for educational purposes.
Work may continue on other parts of the Project while evaluation and, if
necessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA Guidelines Section15064.5 [f]). If
a resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a
“historical resource” or “unique archaeological resource”, time allotment and
funding sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidance measures, or
appropriate mitigation, must be available. The treatment plan established
for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5(f) for historical resources.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
During grading and
construction
On-site inspection,
other agency
permit/approval
TCR-5: Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of
treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include
implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to remove the
resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. Any
historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be
curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the
materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or
the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If
no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be offered to a
local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
During grading and
construction
Onsite inspection,
other agency
permit/approval
Page 451
MMRP
Jersey Industrial Complex Project Final EIR
January 2022 8
TABLE 1-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Monitoring
Timing of
Verification
Method of
Verification
Verified
Date/initials
TCR-6: Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1)
as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or
skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in
PRC 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute. Health and
Safety Code 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material
shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and excavation halted
until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner
recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has
reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall
contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) and PRC 5097.98 shall be followed.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
During grading and
construction
On-site inspection,
other agency
permit/approval
Page 452
Conditions of Approval
Community Development Department
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
Building plans shall demonstrate that all walls comply with wall height requirements, as outlined in
RCMC Chapter 17.48.
1.
Photometric plans submitted during building plan check shall comply with the City's outdoor and site
lighting standards, as outlined in RCMC Sec. 17.58.050.
2.
Design Review DRC2019-00766 is for the approval of a 159,580 square-foot industrial/warehouse
building, subdivided into four (4) suites. Any modifications to the square footage of the overall building,
size of suites, or the number of suites shall require Planning Department review and approval.
3.
Developer shall provide all prospective tenants a disclosure stating that fire and smoke are to be
expected to be visible from the subject property, as the property is located across from a City fire
training center. A draft copy of this disclosure shall be provided to the Planning Department for review,
prior to the issuance of building permits.
4.
Standard Conditions of Approval
All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections
shall be screened from all sides and the sound shall be buffered from adjacent properties and streets as
required by the Planning Department. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the
building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Any roof-mounted
mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically more than 18 inches above the roof or
roof parapet, shall be screened by an architecturally designed enclosure which exhibits a permanent
nature with the building design and is detailed consistent with the building. Any roof-mounted
mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically less than 18 inches above the roof or
roof parapet shall be painted consistent with the color scheme of the building. Details shall be included
in building plans.
5.
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.
6.
www.CityofRC.us
Printed: 2/1/2022
ITEM G1: 4/20/2022 -ADDITIONAL MATERIAL - UPDATED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
7.
8.
9.
10.
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. In the event such legal action is filed, the City shall estimate its expenses for litigation. The applicant
shall deposit such amount with the City or enter into an agreement with the City to pay such expenses as they
become due.
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.
The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of
Determination & Environmental Impact Report fee in the amount of $3,495.25. 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.
Any approval shall expire if Building Permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within
2 years from the date of approval or a time extension has been granted.
This project is subject to public art requirement outlined in Chapter 17.124 of the Development Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permits (for grading or construction), the applicant shall inform the
Planning Department of their choice to install public art, donate art or select the in-lieu option as outlined
in 17.124.020.D.
If the project developer chooses to pay the in -lieu fee, the in-lieu art fee will be invoiced on the building
permit by the City and shall be paid by the applicant prior to building permit issuance.
If the project developer chooses to install art, they shall submit, during the plan check process, an
application for the art work that will be installed on the project site that contains information applicable to
the art work in addition to any other information as may be required by the City to adequately evaluate
the proposed the art work in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 17.124.
If the project developer chooses to donate art, applications for art work donated to the City shall be
subject to review by the Public Art Committee which shall make a recommendation whether the
proposed donation is consistent with Chapter 17.124 and final acceptance by the City Council.
No final approval, such as a final inspection or the a issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, for any
development project (or if a multi-phased project, the final phase of a development project) that is
subject to this requirement shall occur unless the public art requirement has been fulfilled to the
satisfaction of the Planning Department.
11.
www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the
case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for
Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits for the development or
prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. For development occurring in the Very
High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, the landscape plans will also be reviewed by Fire Construction
Services.
12.
Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the
perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer.
13.
A minimum of 20 percent of trees planted within industrial projects, and a minimum of 30 percent within
commercial and office projects, shall be specimen size trees - 24-inch box or larger.
14.
Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking stalls.15.
The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the
required landscape plans and shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval and
coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the
Engineering Services Department.
16.
Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for Planning Director review and approval
prior to issuance of Building Permits. These criteria shall encourage the natural growth characteristics
of the selected tree species.
17.
Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree per
30 linear feet of building.
18.
All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design
shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department.
19.
Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient
landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82.
20.
All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet.21.
All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and
exits shall be striped per City standards.
22.
The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. Any
signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall require separate
application and approval by the Planning Department prior to installation of any signs.
23.
Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other
applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and/or Master Plans in effect at
the time of Building Permit issuance.
24.
All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including
proper illumination and in conformance with Building and Safety Services Department standards, the
Municipal Code and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Department (RCFD) Standards.
25.
www.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Planning Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
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, and the Development Code
regulations.
26.
Downspouts shall not be visible from the exterior of any elevations of the buildings. All downspouts shall
be routed through the interior of the building walls.
27.
All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc ., shall be located
out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry
walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. For single -family
residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults.
28.
All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner,
homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance
shall be submitted for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department review and approved
prior to the issuance of Building Permits.
29.
A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Director and Police Department (909-477-2800 ) prior to the issuance of Building Permits .
Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to
adversely affect adjacent properties.
30.
Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all California Building Code and State
Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Services Department to show
compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance and final acceptance granted prior to
occupancy.
31.
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.
32.
Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of
Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
33.
Trash receptacle (s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and the
number of trash receptacles shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the
issuance of Building Permits.
34.
Engineering Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
Any existing public improvements that are damaged or substandard such as sidewalks, driveways, curb
& gutters, asphalt, etc, shall be removed and replaced to the current City Standards.
1.
www.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
Developer shall limit vehicular access of the east driveway along Jersey Blvd to passenger cars only. All
truck access along Jersey Blvd shall be right -in, right-out only at the west driveway along this frontage .
Provide a driveway design to include an island median and all signing and striping to be reviewed
during the plan check process.
2.
Rail Spurs:
The City has a strong interest in creating urban trails that increase connectivity between neighborhoods,
workplaces, and other destinations. To that end, General Plan Policy CS -6.3 provides: “Continue to
incorporate, where feasible, regional and community trails along utility corridors and drainage
channels.” Further, the City supports the eventual closure and abandonment of railroad spurs to avoid
unnecessary crossings. A north /south railroad spur currently owned by the BNSF Railway (“BNSF”) is
located on portions of APNs 0229-111-15 and 0209-145-11 (the “Rail Spur”), immediately west of the
subject property (APN 0229-111-60). Although the applicant does not currently own the Rail Spur, the
City believes that BNSF may convey some or all of the Rail Spur to the applicant or a subsequent owner
of the subject property when the Rail Spur is no longer necessary for BNSF ’s operations. If BNSF
conveys some or all of the Rail Spur and the fee interest in the underlying real property immediately
adjacent to the subject property to the applicant or a subsequent owner, then the applicant or
subsequent owner shall make an irrevocable offer to dedicate such real property to the City for use as a
public trail. The applicant shall record a covenant against the subject property that implements the
terms of this condition.
3.
Standard Conditions of Approval
Easements for public sidewalks placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City.4.
Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards.5.
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.
6.
** CD Information Required Prior to Sign-Off for Building Permit
Prior to the issuance of building permits, if valuation is greater or equal to $100,000, a Diversion
Deposit and a related administrative fee shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion
Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 65% of all wastes generated during construction and
demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Applicant
must identify if they are self -hauling or utilizing Burrtec prior to issuance of a building permit. Proof of
diversion must be submitted to the Environmental Engineering Division within 60 days following the
completion of the construction and / or demolition project.
Contact Marissa Ostos, Environmental Engineering, at (909) 774-4062 for more information.
Instructions and forms are available at the City's website, www .cityofrc.us, under City Hall / Engineering /
Environmental Programs / Construction & Demolition Diversion Program.
7.
www.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
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.
8.
Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to:
Curb & Gutter
A.C. Pvmt
Side-walk
Drive Appr.
Street Lights
etc.
Notes: (a) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check.
9.
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.
10.
Improvement Plans and Construction:
a. Street improvement plans, including street trees 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 street improvements, prior to the issuance of Building Permits.
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, and traffic signing shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
d. 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.
e. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to
City Standards, except for single-family residential lots.
11.
www.CityofRC.us Page 6 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
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
Botanical Name
Common Name
Min. Grow Space
Spacing
Size
Qty.
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.
12.
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.
13.
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.
14.
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.
15.
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 issuance of Building Permits .
Formation costs shall be borne by the developer.
16.
Developer shall execute a Line Extension Agreement for electric service and shall construct electrical
distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and shall construct electrical distribution
facilities in accordance with such agreement and Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility requirements
and dedicate such facilities to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility. The Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Utility shall be the electrical service provider for all project related development.
17.
www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
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.
18.
The separate parcels contained within the project boundaries shall be legally combined into one parcel
prior to issuance of Building Permits.
19.
Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
Locking and latching hardware for access doors is required to be operable from the exterior of the
building and is required to be single action latch/lock release on the interior of the building.
1.
Access doors are required to be identified in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-5. The Standard
has been uploaded to the Documents section.
2.
Access doors are required to be distributed along the exterior of the building such that the lineal
distance between adjacent access doors does not exceed 125 feet measured center to center.
3.
Required alarm systems and supervision systems are required to be in accordance with Fire District
Standard 9-3. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.
4.
Plans for the alarm and /or supervision (monitoring) system are required to be submitted separately and
issued a separate permit. Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for routing to the Fire
District.
5.
Plans for the egress lighting are required to be submitted separately and issued a separate permit .
Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for routing to the Fire District.
6.
Plans for high piled combustible storage are required to be submitted separately and issued a separate
permit. Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for routing to the Fire District.
7.
Plans for the private, onsite fire underground water infrastructure are required to be submitted
separately and issued a separate permit. Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for
routing to the Fire District.
8.
Plans for the public, offsite fire underground water infrastructure are required to be submitted separately
and issued a separate permit. Plans are required to be submitted prior to or concurrently with the
submittal of the Water District mylars. Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for routing to
the Fire District.
9.
Plans for the racks used for high piled combustible storage are required to be submitted separately and
issued a separate permit. Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for routing to the Fire
District.
10.
Plans for the sprinkler system are required to be submitted separately and issued a separate permit .
Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for routing to the Fire District.
11.
www.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
Exterior doors and doors providing access to fire protection and life safety systems and equipment are
required to have identification signage in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-5. The Standard has
been uploaded to the Documents section.
12.
The location, size, construction materials, or other features of this building and the associated project
are such that adequate emergency responder radio coverage may not be achievable within the building
that is proposed. It is highly recommended that a radio signal strength assessment is completed by San
Bernardino County Information Services Department (ISD). Please contact Tim Trager with County ISD
at 909-388-5563 or ttrager@isd.sbcounty.gov
Upon substantial completion and final completion of construction, the fire code official will oversee a
radio signal strength test that is in accordance with the California Fire Code. If acceptable radio
coverage cannot be achieved after construction is completed, equipment necessary to increase the
radio signal strength or otherwise allow adequate emergency responder radio communication will be
required to be installed.
13.
Designated and conforming aerial apparatus access is required in accordance with Fire District
Standard 5-1. Show aerial apparatus access on the fire access plan. The Standard has been uploaded
to the Documents section.
14.
Fire apparatus access (fire lane) design, construction, and identification are required to be in
accordance with Fire District Standard 5-1. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents
section.
15.
Fire extinguishers are required in accordance with Section 906 of the California Fire Code. Consult with
the Fire Inspector for the correct type, size, and exact installation locations.
16.
Fire flow information for this project is obtained from the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD).
CVWD can be reached at 909-944-6000 or custserv@cvwdwater.com.
17.
Fire flow is required to be in accordance with Appendix B of the California Fire Code. The Fire District
has adopted the appendix without local amendments. Proof of the availability of the required fire flow
must be provided to the Fire District in the form of a letter or written report dated within the past 12
months.
18.
Fire sprinkler are required to be installed in accordance with Fire District Standard 9-5. The Standard
has been uploaded to the Documents section.
19.
Gates installed across a commercial /industrial emergency vehicle access road (fire lane) are required
to be in accordance with Standard 5-4. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.
20.
A Knox Box key box is required in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-9. Additional boxes may be
required depending on the size of the building, the location of fire protection and life safety system
controls, and the operational needs of the Fire District. The Standard has been uploaded to the
Documents section. If an installed Knox Box is available to this project or business, keys for the
building/suite/unit are required to be provided to the Fire Inspector at the final inspection.
21.
www.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
Coordinate landscaping with the roof access ladder points and address signage. Landscaping cannot
obstruct roof access or clear visibility of address signage from time of installation to maturity of the
shrubs and trees.
22.
A fire service site plan is required in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-11. The Standard has
been uploaded to the Documents section.
23.
Roof access is required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-6. The Standard has been
uploaded to the Documents section.
24.
Street address and unit /suite signage for commercial and industrial buildings are required to be in
accordance with Fire District Standard 5-8. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents
section.
25.
Identification of fire protection systems and components, fire alarm systems and components, and
equipment and devices associated with fire and life safety systems is required to be in accordance with
Fire District Standards 5-5 and 5-10. The Standards have been uploaded to the Documents section.
26.
Fire apparatus access roads (fire lanes) can be included in an engineered onsite storm water retention
plan. The ponding of storm water shall not exceed a designed depth of four (4) inches in the designated
fire apparatus access road (s) and the area between the fire apparatus access road (s) and the exterior
walls of all normally occupied buildings.
27.
Public and private fire service water mains, public and private hydrants, water control valves, fire
sprinkler risers, fire department connections (FDCs), and other fire protection water related devices and
equipment are required to be provided, designed, and installed in accordance with Fire District
Standard 5-10. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.
28.
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 and T-24 energy calcualtions to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the
current edition of the California Building and Fire Codes including all local ordinances and standards .
The new structure is required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. A soils report is required for
new structures. Disabled access to the site and building must be provided in accordance to the State of
California published thresholds at the time of plan check submittal
1.
Grading Section
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
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.
1.
Standard Conditions of Approval
www.CityofRC.us Page 10 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
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.
2.
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.
3.
The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be
completed, submitted, and approved by the City Engineer, or designee, prior to the issuance of building
permits.
4.
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.
5.
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.
6.
If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan /Permit are submitted to the Engineering Services for review, the
rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage
Plan/Permit.
7.
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.
8.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility
path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance
with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail
including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building
Code.
9.
The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible,
and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings.
10.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking
stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current
adopted California Building Code.
11.
This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building
Code.
12.
www.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
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.
13.
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.
14.
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.
15.
Prior to approval of the project -specific storm water quality management plan, the applicant shall submit
to the City Engineer, or his designee, 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.
16.
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, or his designee 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.
17.
Roof water is not permitted to flow over the public parkway and shall be directed to an under parkway
culvert per City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements prior to issuance of a grading permit.
18.
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.
19.
www.CityofRC.us Page 12 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
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).
20.
Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of
the project Conditions of Approval.
21.
Prior to the issuance of a 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, or his designee, and recorded with the County Recorder’s Office.
22.
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.
23.
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.
24.
The land owner 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 land owner 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 land owner.
25.
The land owner 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 land owner 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 land owner.
26.
The land/property owner 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.
27.
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 grading permit or any building permit.
28.
The Site and Drainage Plan in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan shall show the
locations of all roof downspout drains. if required for storm water quality purposes, the downspouts shall
include filters.
29.
www.CityofRC.us Page 13 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
Prior to the issuance of a building permit or Engineering Services Department issued right of way
permit, 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.
30.
Prior to the start of landscaping operations, the landscape architect and the landscape contractor shall
provide a sample of the weed fabric barrier to the Project Planner, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning
Department. The weed barrier shall be permeable.
31.
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.
32.
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.
33.
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”.
34.
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”.
35.
www.CityofRC.us Page 14 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
GROUND WATER PROTECTION:
Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP
document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No .
R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm
Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads:
Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection):
Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to
primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer
strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect
groundwater:
a.Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of
ground water quality objectives.
b.Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater
quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior
to infiltration.
c.Adequate pretreatment of runoff prior to infiltration shall be required in gas stations and large
commercial parking lots. (NOTE: The State Water Quality Control Board defines a large commercial
parking lot as ‘100,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial development to include parking lot (with 100 or
more vehicle traffics ), OR, by means of 5,000sqft or more of allowable space designated for parking
purposes’).
d.Unless adequate pre -treatment of runoff is provided prior to infiltration structural infiltration treatment
BMPs must not be used for areas of industrial or light industrial activity{77}, areas subject to high
vehicular traffic (25,000 or more daily traffic ); car washes; fleet storage areas; nurseries; or any other
high threat to water quality land uses or activities.
e.Class V injection wells or dry wells must not be placed in areas subject to vehicular{78} repair or
maintenance activities{79}, such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used
car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does
any vehicular repair work.
f.Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have soil and
groundwater contamination.
g.Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water
supply wells.
h.The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high
groundwater mark shall be at least 10-feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial
uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained.
i.Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water
Code Section 13050.
36.
www.CityofRC.us Page 15 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022
Project #: DRC2019-00766
Project Name: EDR - Jersey and Milliken Warehouse
Location: -- - 022911160-0000
Project Type: Design Review
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:
Grading Section
Standard Conditions of Approval
NONRESIDENTIAL MANDATORY MEASURES – CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS
CODE – Prior to the issuance of any building permit the applicant shall comply with Section 5.106.10
(Grading and paving) of the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code:
Construction plans shall indicate how site grading or a drainage system will manage all surface water
flows to keep water from entering buildings. 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.
37.
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 designee.
38.
(Grd.100) Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall show on the site plan and the
permitted grading plan set for non -residential projects the designated parking for clean air vehicles per
the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code, section 5.106.5.2.
39.
(Grd.017) 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”.
40.
(Grd.101) Prior to issuance of a grading permit for non -residential projects the applicant shall show on
the electrical plans and the permitted grading plan set the location for a future installation of an Electric
Vehicle (EV) charging station/parking area per the current adopted California Green Building
Standards Code, section 5.106.5.3.
41.
www.CityofRC.us Page 16 of 16Printed: 2/1/2022
Jersey and Milliken Industrial Building
Appeal
April 20, 2022
Project Background
Applicant: Ralph Karubian
Project: Design Review to construct a 159,580
square-foot industrial/warehouse building. Approved
by PC on February 9, 2022. Appealed on February 17,
2022.
Appellant: Lozeau Drury, LLP on behalf of the
Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility
(“SAFER”)
Project Summary
•Meets all pertinent development standards.
•Meets architectural standards for prominent corner.
•Structure and proposed use is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan.
•Meets City Council goals.
Subject Property
JERSEY BLVD MILLIKEN AVEN
SUBJECT
PROPERTY
JERSEY BLVD.MILLIKEN AVE.
N
PROJECT
SITE
Subject Property
JERSEY BLVD MILLIKEN AVE
N
Environmental Assessment
•Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for
project (State Clearing House No. 2021060608).
•Upon implementation of the project and all
mitigation measures, impacts associated with the
project will remain less than significant.
Appeal
•Appellant asserts project’s EIR fails to thoroughly
analyze the project’s impacts related to:
•Biological Resources (5 Comments)
•Air Quality (3 Comments)
Biological Resources -Comments
•EIR fails to establish accurate baseline for sensitive
biological resources.
•EIR fails to address potential significant impact on
loss of breeding capacity.
•EIR inadequately analyzed impacts on:
-Wildlife Movement
-Wildlife from Additional Traffic
-Cumulative Impacts on wildlife in the region
Biological Resources -Responses
•Site survey conducted meets CEQA standards. Site
does not support long-term nesting habitat.
•Site surrounded by industrial uses and two major
streets.
•Site has no trees.
•Vegetation periodically cleared for weed
abatement.
•Site previously graded for remediation.
Air Quality -Comments
•EIR Relies on inaccurate air quality model to
determine project emissions.
•EIR fails to address health risk impacts because no
health risk assessment was conducted.
•EIR fails to adequately evaluate GhG impacts.
Air Quality -Responses
•Air Quality modelling for both project emissions
and GhG was done correctly and conservatively.
•Traffic volumes from project falls below threshold
for needing a health risks assessment.
Revised Condition of Approval
•Modification to the Condition of Approval #7 for the
project.
•Updates standard language related to the City’s
indemnity clause.
Recommendation
•Staff reviewed the appellant’s comments and the applicant’s responses.
•EIR as certified by the Planning Commission on February 9, 2022, adequately addresses all CEQA requirements.
•Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal, certify the EIR, uphold the Planning Commission decision to approve Design Review DRC2019-00766, and approve a modification to the COAs of project.
DATE:April 20, 2022
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Flavio Nunez, Management Analyst II
Matthew R. Burris, Deputy City Manager - Community Development
Interim Planning Director
SUBJECT:Public Hearing for the Approval of the Draft 2022-2023 Action Plan for the
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Conduct a public hearing a receive comments on the draft 2022-2023 Action Plan for
the use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds.
2. Approve the 2022-2023 Action Plan and authorize the City Manager, or designee, to
submit the plan and any necessary amendments to the plan to the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
3. Provide City Staff with a methodology to distribute funds should the City’s 2022-2023
CDBG annual allocation increase or decrease.
4. Authorize the City Manager, or designee, to negotiate, execute, and amend contracts
with subrecipients or professional service providers as necessary to implement the CDBG
projects identified in the 2022-2023 Action Plan.
5. Authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute, amend, and submit to HUD all
plans and documents necessary to administer the 2022-2023 CDBG programs.
6. Authorize the appropriation of funds for the 2022-2023 CDBG program.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council adopted the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan
on April 15, 2020, which described the City’s housing and community development needs
and strategies to address those needs over five years using HUD entitlement grant funds.
The 2022-2023 Action Plan is the third of five annual plans implementing the 2020-2024
Consolidated Plan Strategic Plan Goals to invest annual allocations of CDBG funds from
HUD.
As part of its responsibility in receiving these funds, the City must prepare and submit an
annual Action Plan outlining the proposed uses of CDBG funds to address the priorities
in the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan. To comply with HUD regulations, the 2022-2023
Action Plan must be submitted to HUD on or before May 13, 2022.
Page 453
Page 2
1
2
3
3
ANALYSIS:
As of the date of this meeting, HUD has not released the City’s CDBG annual allocation
and therefore HUD has advised the City to prepare its Action Plan utilizing the City’s
current year CDBG annual allocation. For this reason, it is anticipated that during the
2022-2023 program year, the City will receive approximately $1,070,323 of CDBG funds
to be allocated to eligible activities. The program activities listed below will be
implemented from July 1, 2022, to June 30, 2023.
Public Service Activities
City of Rancho Cucamonga: Farmer's Market Partnership $17,000
City of Rancho Cucamonga: CASA $12,000
Northtown Housing Development Corporation: Senior Food Bank Meal
Program $15,500
City of Rancho Cucamonga: Jane Penny LINK Program $9,600
City of Rancho Cucamonga: Financial Assistance Program $12,000
City of Rancho Cucamonga: Graffiti Removal Program $15,000
Impact Southern California: Homeless Prevention/Rapid Rehousing
Program $25,000
House of Ruth: Domestic Violence Services and Prevention $12,224
Family Service Association: Senior Nutrition Program $15,000
Foothill Family Shelter: Housing and Food Security Program $15,000
Inland Valley Hope Partners: Food Security/Family Stabilization $12,224
Sub-Total:$160,548
Capital Activities
City of Rancho Cucamonga: Housing Rehabilitation Program $330,011
City of Rancho Cucamonga: Sidewalk Grinding Project $45,700
City of Rancho Cucamonga: Pecan Ave. & Whittram Ave. Street
Improvement Project $290,000
City of Rancho Cucamonga: 21/22 Concrete Rehabilitation Project $30,000
Sub-Total:$695,711
Program Administration Activities
CDBG Program Administration $194,064
Inland Fair Housing and Mediation Board: Fair Housing Services $20,000
Sub-Total:$214,064
TOTAL 2022-2023 CDBG PROGRAM $1,070,323
Page 454
Page 3
1
2
3
3
Due to the uncertainty in the City’s 2022-2023 annual allocation, a request of the City
Council is being made to provide staff and the public with a methodology for which activity
budgets will be adjusted when the final allocation is released by HUD. It is recommended
that City Council adopt the following language for adjusting activity budgets for the CDBG
program:
Should the CDBG allocation be higher than $1,070,323:
o Balance of additional funds will be allocated to the Pecan Ave. & Whittram
Ave. Street Improvement Project.
o Funding levels for all outstanding activities will remain the same as
proposed in the 2022-2023 Action Plan.
Should the CDBG allocation be lower than $1,070,323:
o Fair Housing services will remain funded at $20,000 but the CDBG
Administration budget will be reduced to be compliant with the 20% cap for
Administration activities.
o All Public Service activities will receive an equitable reduction to be
compliant with the 15% cap for Public Service activities.
o Balance of funds will be deducted from the Pecan Ave. & Whittram Ave.
Street Improvement Project.
o Funding levels for all outstanding activities will remain the same as
proposed in the 2022-2023 Action Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There will be no negative impact to the General Fund as a result of the planned projects.
As an entitlement grantee, the City is eligible to receive CDBG funds annually from HUD.
The 2022-2023 Action Plan allocates approximately $1,070,323 (or as otherwise
determined by HUD) of CDBG funds in furtherance of the City’s Consolidated Plan
Strategic Plan Goals. The following appropriations are requested to allocate the CDBG
funding:
1204000-4750/2050-0 (CDBG Fund-Grant Income-Federal) $1,070,323
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
ENHANCING PREMIER COMMUNITY STATUS: The acceptance of the funds and
implementation of the programs will enhance the City’s status by ensuring residents have
access to a wide array of public services and decent affordable housing with suitable
living conditions.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Draft 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan
Page 455
Annual Action Plan
FY 2022-2023
Draft
April 20, 2022
Amendment 1
Attachment 1
Page 456
City of Rancho Cucamonga i 2022 Annual Action Plan
This page intentionally left blank
Page 457
City of Rancho Cucamonga ii 2022 Annual Action Plan
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ - 1 -
AP-05 Executive Summary - 24 CFR 91.200(c), 91.220(b) ............................................................... - 1 -
PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies – 91.200(b) ............................................................................. - 8 -
AP-10 Consultation – 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(l) .......................................................................... - 9 -
AP-12 Participation – 91.105, 91.200(c) ........................................................................................ - 19 -
Expected Resources ......................................................................................................................... - 28 -
AP-15 Expected Resources – 91.220(c)(1,2) ................................................................................. - 28 -
Annual Goals and Objectives ............................................................................................................ - 32 -
AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives............................................................................................... - 32 -
AP-35 Projects – 91.220(d) ........................................................................................................... - 34 -
AP-38 Project Summary ................................................................................................................ - 35 -
AP-50 Geographic Distribution – 91.220(f) ..................................................................................... - 40 -
Affordable Housing ........................................................................................................................... - 42 -
AP-75 Barriers to Affordable Housing ............................................................................................. - 42 -
AP-85 Other Actions – 91.220(k) ................................................................................................... - 45 -
Program Specific Requirements ........................................................................................................ - 47 -
AP-90 Program Specific Requirements – 91.220(l)(1,2,4) ............................................................... - 47 -
Action Plan Tables
Table 1 – Strategic Plan Summary ....................................................................................................... - 4 -
Table 2 – Responsible Agencies .......................................................................................................... - 8 -
Table 3 - Agencies, groups, organizations who participated................................................................ - 17 -
Table 4 - Other local / regional / federal planning efforts ..................................................................... - 17 -
Table 5 – Citizen Participation Outreach ............................................................................................ - 27 -
Table 6 - Expected Resources – Priority Table ................................................................................... - 28 -
Table 7 – Goals Summary ................................................................................................................. - 32 -
Table 8 - Project Information ............................................................................................................. - 34 -
Table 9 - Geographic Distribution ...................................................................................................... - 40 -
Page 458
City of Rancho Cucamonga iii 2022 Annual Action Plan
Version History
No. Summary of Changes
1
Published Draft for Public Comment: 03/18/20
22 Sent to HUD for Approval: 05/13/20
22
Conducted Public Hearing: 04/20/20
22 Approved by HUD: TBD
Original 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan.
Page 459
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 1 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Executive Summary
AP-05 Executive Summary - 24 CFR 91.200(c), 91.220(b)
1. Introduction
On April 15, 2020, the Rancho Cucamonga City Council adopted the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan which
described the City's housing and community development needs, strategies and activities to address those
needs over a five-year period using entitlement grant funds provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD). The 2022-2023 Action Plan is the third of five annual plans implementing the
2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Strategic Plan goals via the investment of annual allocations of Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from HUD. The Action Plan identifies available resources, annual
goals, projects, and activities for the period beginning July 1, 2022, and ending June 30, 2023.
The City receives CDBG funds from HUD on a formula basis each year, and in turn, awards grants and loans
to non-profit, for-profit, or public organizations for programs and projects in furtherance of this Plan. The
CDBG program provides for a wide range of eligible activities for the benefit of low- and moderate-income
Rancho Cucamonga residents, as discussed below.
In addition, the City is a member of the San Bernardino County HOME Consortium. The HOME Investment
Partnerships Program (HOME) is an additional HUD formula grant that provides funding to support the
acquisition, construction, and rehabilitation of affordable rental and homeownership housing. The County
administers the program and oversees HOME activities and programs that occur in Rancho Cucamonga.
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 created the CDBG Program with three primary
objectives against which HUD evaluates the Consolidated Plan and the City's performance. Those primary
objectives are decent housing, suitable living environments, and expanded economic opportunities for low-
and moderate-income persons. The CDBG regulations require that each activity meet one of the following
national objectives:
• Benefit low- and moderate-income persons; or
• Aid in the prevention or elimination of slums and blight; or
• Meet other community development needs having a particular urgency (usually the result of a natural
disaster).
Each year, the City certifies with the submission of its Annual Action Plan that it has given maximum feasible
priority to activities, which meet the first and second objectives above. Additionally, the City certifies that no
less than 70 percent of the CDBG funds received, over a three-year certification period, will be designed to
benefit low- and moderate-income persons.
Page 460
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 2 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
2022-2023 Program Year
As of the date of the preparation of this document, HUD has not yet released the City’s annual allocation.
However, for the 2022-2023 program year, the City anticipates receiving $1,070,323 of CDBG funds. The
2022-2023 Action Plan allocates $1,070,323 of CDBG funds to the following program activities to be
implemented from July 1, 2022, through June 30, 2023.
Due to the uncertainty in the City’s 2022-2023 annual allocation, a request of the City Council is being made
to provide staff and the public with a methodology for which activity budgets will be adjusted when the final
allocation is released by HUD. It is recommended that City Council adopt the following language for adjusting
activity budgets for the CDBG program:
• Should the CDBG allocation be higher than $1,070,323:
o Balance of additional funds will be allocated to the Pecan Ave. & Whittram Ave. Street
Improvement Project.
o Funding levels for all outstanding activities will remain the same as proposed in the 2022-
2023 Action Plan.
• Should the CDBG allocation be lower than $1,070,323:
o Fair Housing services will remain funded at $20,000 but the CDBG Administration budget will
be reduced to be compliant with the 20% cap for Administration activities.
o All Public Service activities will receive an equitable reduction to be compliant with the 15%
cap for Public Service activities.
o Balance of funds will be deducted from the Pecan Ave. & Whittram Ave. Street Improvement
Project.
o Funding levels for all outstanding activities will remain the same as proposed in the 2022-
2023 Action Plan.
2022-2023 Public Service Activities
City of Rancho Cucamonga: Farmer's Market Partnership $17,000
City of Rancho Cucamonga: CASA $12,000
Northtown Housing Development Corporation: Senior Food Bank
Meal Program $15,500
City of Rancho Cucamonga: Jane Penny LINK Program $9,600
City of Rancho Cucamonga: Financial Assistance Program $12,000
City of Rancho Cucamonga: Graffiti Removal Program $15,000
Impact Southern California: Homeless Prevention/Rapid Rehousing
Program $25,000
House of Ruth: Domestic Violence Services and Prevention $12,224
Family Service Association: Senior Nutrition Program $15,000
Foothill Family Shelter: Housing and Food Security Program $15,000
Inland Valley Hope Partners: Food Security/Family Stabilization $12,224
Page 461
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 3 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Sub-Total: $160,548
2022-2023 Capital Activities
City of Rancho Cucamonga: Housing Rehabilitation Program $330,011
City of Rancho Cucamonga: Sidewalk Grinding Project $45,700
City of Rancho Cucamonga: Pecan Ave. & Whittram Ave. Street
Improvement Project $290,000
City of Rancho Cucamonga: 21/22 Concrete Rehabilitation Project $30,000
Sub-Total: $695,711
2022-2023 Program Administration Activities
CDBG Program Administration $194,064
Inland Fair Housing and Mediation Board: Fair Housing Services $20,000
Sub-Total: $214,064
TOTAL 2022-2023 CDBG PROGRAM $1,070,323
Page 462
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 4 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
2. Summarize the objectives and outcomes identified in the Plan
HUD's Community Planning and Development (CPD) Outcome Performance Measurement Framework
classifies objectives in three (3) categories: decent housing, a suitable living environment, and economic
opportunity. In consideration of community input as well as the Needs Assessment and Market Analysis, the
Strategic Plan identifies five (5) high priority needs to be addressed through the implementation of activities
with four (4) Strategic Plan goals.
The high priority needs include:
• Preserve the supply of affordable housing
• Equal access to housing opportunities
• Public services for low- and moderate-income residents
• Improve public facilities and infrastructure
• Address material and architectural barriers to accessibility for elderly persons and severely disabled
adults
Consistent with HUD's national goals for the CDBG program to provide decent housing opportunities,
maintain a suitable living environment and expand economic opportunities for low- and moderate-income
residents, the priority needs listed above will be addressed over the next five years through the
implementation of CDBG funded activities aligned with the following measurable goals included in the
Strategic Plan section of this Plan:
Goal Name Category Need(s) Addressed Goal Outcome
Indicator
1 Fair Housing
Services
Affordable
Housing
Equal access to housing
opportunities 2,000 people
2 Public Services
Non-Housing
Community
Development
Public services for low-
and moderate-income
residents
5,000 people
3
Affordable
Housing
Preservation
Affordable
Housing
Preserve the supply of
affordable housing
100 owner housing
units
4
Public Facilities
and Infrastructure
Improvements
Non-Housing
Community
Development
Improve public facilities
and infrastructure
Address barriers to
accessibility
15 public facilities
25,000 people
Table 1 – Strategic Plan Summary
Page 463
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 5 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
3. Evaluation of past performance
The City is currently implementing the projects and activities included in the 2021-2022 Action Plan. As of
this writing, all projects and activities are underway.
During the 2020-2021 program year, the City and its partnering organizations were able to accomplish the
following:
• Fair Housing Services: provided 562 unduplicated residents with fair housing and landlord-tenant
mediation services.
• Public Services: provided a range of services to seniors, survivors of domestic violence, and low- and
moderate-income families including but not limited to providing meals to 474 elderly individuals,
homeless prevention services to 239 people, domestic violence shelter and counseling services for
111 residents, access to food bank services for 690 residents, nutritional health services to 131
people, and skilled care for 100 homebound seniors.
• Affordable Housing Preservation: completed four (4) housing rehabilitations for low- and moderate-
income homeowners to address deficient housing conditions.
• Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements: The School Crosswalk Improvements and Westerly
Sidewalk Improvements projects commenced and are scheduled for completion during the first
quarter of the 2021-2022 program year
• COVID-19 Response: The City of Rancho Cucamonga utilized its CDBG-CV funds to implement an
Emergency Housing Assistance activity. This public service program provided up to three (3) months
of assistance to low- and moderate-income residents that were negatively impacted by COVID-19.
As a result of these efforts, the City assisted 175 households. The City commenced the
implementation of the City’s Emergency Small Business Assistance and Microenterprise Assistance
Programs during the 2021-2022 Program Year.
The investment of HUD resources during the 2015-2019 program years resulted in measurable
accomplishments that contributed to positive outcomes for Rancho Cucamonga residents. Together with
other federal, state and local investments, HUD resources allowed the City of Rancho Cucamonga and its
partners to:
• Preserve and improve the existing housing stock and ensure equal access through rehabilitation of
owner-occupied housing units;
• Provide fair housing services to residents;
• Provide healthy meals to residents;
• Provide transportation services to seniors; and
• Provide homelessness prevention and assistance services to residents.
While the City and local partners were able to successfully implement the activities listed above during the
last six (6) years, there were insufficient resources to fully address the level of need for the community.
Page 464
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 6 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
4. Summary of Citizen Participation Process and consultation process
The Consolidated Plan regulations at 24 CFR Part 91 provide the citizen participation and consultation
requirements for the development of the Consolidated Plan. Chief among those requirements is the need to
consult with the Continuum of Care (CoC) to address homelessness, Public Housing Authorities (PHA),
business leaders, civic leaders and public or private agencies that address housing, health, social service,
victim services, employment, or education needs of low-income individuals and families, homeless individuals
and families, youth and/or other persons with special needs. This qualitative input was combined with a
quantitative analysis of demographic, housing and socioeconomic data to develop the strategic plan that
reflects the housing, community and economic development needs and priorities for the City over the next
five years.
In accordance with the City's Citizen Participation Plan, residents and stakeholders were able to participate
in the development of the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan through surveys, community meetings and public
hearings. Efforts were made to encourage participation by low- and moderate-income persons, particularly
those living in areas where HUD funds are proposed to be used, and by residents of predominantly low- and
moderate-income neighborhoods. Efforts were made to encourage the participation of minorities and non-
English speaking persons, as well as persons with disabilities. The consultation process included
representatives of the CoC, PHA, and other specified groups who completed surveys, provided local data,
and assisted the City to ensure practical coordination of strategies to maximize impact and to avoid
duplication of effort.
To satisfy the federal requirements at 24 CFR 91.105(e)(1)(ii), the City held two public hearings to obtain
residents' views on housing and community development needs, development of proposed activities,
proposed strategies and actions for affirmatively furthering fair housing, and a review of program
performance. The City convened the first public hearing on September 15, 2021, to receive comments
regarding program performance. A draft of the 2020-2021 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation
Report (CAPER) was made available for public review and comment from August 27, 2021, to September
15, 2021. No public comments were received.
Subsequently, the City made the draft 2022-2023 Action Plan available for public review and comment from
March 18, 2022, to April 20, 2022. Residents were invited to review the draft Action Plan and to attend the
Public Hearing on April 20, 2022 or submit written comments concerning the housing and community
development needs, proposed projects and activities in the Action Plan, as well as proposed strategies and
actions for affirmatively furthering fair housing. No public comments were received.
During the development of the 2022-2023 Action Plan, the City solicited applications from various non-profit
organizations and City Departments for the provision of fair housing services, public services, and community
and economic development projects. Applications received by the January 21, 2022, deadline were
evaluated for eligibility and funding recommendations.
Page 465
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 7 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
5. Summary of public comments
As required by HUD regulations, all comments received, and responses to said comments by the City are
summarized in section AP-12 of this Action Plan. No comments were received during the April 20, 2022,
public hearing.
6. Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them
All comments and views received by the City in the development of the Action Plan were accepted and taken
into consideration in the development of the Action Plan.
7. Summary
The 2022-2023 Action Plan addresses each of the four (4) Strategic Plan Goals from the 2020-2024
Consolidated Plan by allocating a total of $1,070,323 in CDBG funds towards eligible activities that are to be
implemented from July 1, 2022, to June 30, 2023. Activities submitted for consideration in response to any
solicitation of Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) process must conform with one (1) of the four (4)
Strategic Plan strategies and the associated action-oriented, measurable goals to be considered to receive
CDBG funds.
Page 466
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 8 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies – 91.200(b)
1. Agency/entity responsible for preparing/administering the Consolidated Plan
The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible
for the administration of each grant program and funding source.
Agency Role Name Department/Agency
CDBG Administrator Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department
Table 2 – Responsible Agencies
Narrative
The City's Planning Department is the lead agency responsible for the administration of the CDBG program.
The City contracted with MDG Associates, Inc. to prepare the 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan.
In the development of the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, MDG Associates, Inc. developed and implemented
a comprehensive citizen participation and consultation process and conducted a needs assessment and
market analysis to identify levels of relative need regarding affordable housing, homelessness, special needs,
and community development. This information was gathered through consultation with public officials and
local agencies, public outreach and community meetings, review of demographic and economic data, and
housing market analysis.
In the implementation of the 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan and each of the five (5) Annual Action Plans, the
Planning Department shall be responsible for all grants planning, management and monitoring duties
necessary to comply with HUD regulations and City policy.
Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information
City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department
Flavio Nunez, Management Analyst II
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
(909) 774-4313
Page 467
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 9 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
AP-10 Consultation – 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(l)
1. Introduction
The City consulted with representatives from multiple agencies, groups, and organizations involved in the
preservation of affordable housing and the provision of services to low- and moderate-income residents,
including but not limited to children, elderly persons, persons with disabilities, persons with HIV/AIDS and
their families, and homeless persons. To facilitate the consultation process, the City solicited feedback
through the following methods:
• Survey of residents and stakeholders (web-based and paper-surveys)
• Individual stakeholder consultations
• Community meetings
• Public hearings
• Receipt of written comments
To gather the greatest breadth and depth of information, the City consulted with a wide variety of agencies,
groups and organizations concerning the housing, community and economic development needs of the
community. Each of the agencies, groups or organizations invited to consult and participate in the planning
process is represented in Table 3. The input received from these consultations helped establish and inform
the objectives and goals described in the Strategic Plan.
Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction's activities to enhance coordination between public and
assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health and service agencies
(91.215(I)).
The City recognizes the importance of careful coordination and alignment among various service providers
to maximize the effectiveness of the CDBG programs. As a result, during the development of the
Consolidated Plan, the City consulted with organizations that provide assisted housing, health services and
other community-focused programs. Outreach efforts included surveys, invitations to community meetings,
and follow-up in-person interviews where appropriate.
The City further recognizes the importance of continued coordination and alignment during the upcoming
five-year planning period with these organizations and agencies. The City will reinforce these partnerships
through the implementation of the Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) process for CDBG funds each year
and through technical assistance provided to subrecipients.
Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons
(particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and
unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness
San Bernardino County's homeless Continuum of Care (CoC) is comprised of a network of public, private,
faith-based, for-profit, and non-profit service providers who utilize several federal, state and local resources
Page 468
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 10 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
to provide services for homeless people. The region's municipalities, including the City, also provide
resources for services that assist the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless. The non-profit and
faith-based community plays a key role in the current CoC system. Hundreds of agencies throughout the
County provide programs ranging from feeding the homeless on the street to creating permanent supportive
housing opportunities. These services are available to homeless families with children, and single men and
women. The non-profit and faith-based community also serves special needs populations, such as victims of
domestic violence, veterans, the disabled and youth.
The CoC guides the development of homeless strategies and the implementation of programs to end
homelessness throughout the region. The City provided a detailed questionnaire to the CoC to identify the
CoC's perceived needs in the county and its objectives to address the needs of different homeless persons
populations, specifically chronically homeless families and individuals, families with children, veterans,
unaccompanied youth and persons at risk of homelessness. Following the delivery and response to this
questionnaire, the City followed up with the CoC to clarify existing needs and objectives and understand
opportunities for collaboration and coordination during the five-year planning process.
To address the City's homeless, the City utilizes CDBG funds to provide public and supportive services to
prevent homelessness and/or aid those who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless. Homeless
supportive and prevention services funded through the City's CDBG 2022-2023 program year include:
• House of Ruth – Provides shelter (transitional housing), programs, education, and opportunities for safe,
self-sufficient, healthy living for battered women and their children who are at-risk of homelessness.
• Foothill Family Shelter – Provides a 120-day transitional housing shelter for homeless families with children.
• Impact Southern California – Provides case management, tenant rights counseling, and one-time payments
for housing security deposits and/or rent for individuals experiencing homelessness or at risk of
homelessness.
• Inland Valley Hope Partners – Food security and family stabilization
• Inland Fair Housing and Mediation Board – Addresses fair housing mediation and landlord-tenant dispute
resolution services, which helps prevent homelessness.
Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction's area in determining how to
allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards and evaluate outcomes, and develop funding, policies
and procedures for the administration of HMIS
Although not a direct Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) entitlement community, the City consulted
with a number of housing, social services, governmental and other entities involved in housing and
community development in the City. Through these consultations, the City identified the holistic
needs of the community, including those for extremely low-income households and homeless
households individuals and how the City can continue to effectively coordinate with regional
Page 469
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 11 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
homeless service providers to best meet the needs of these populations. The CoC was consulted
directly in person, by telephone and email to discuss performance standards, outcomes, and
policies and procedures for HMIS.
Table 3 provides a listing of the entities consulted as part of this planning process.
Page 470
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 12 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
2. Describe Agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and
describe the jurisdictions consultations with housing, social service agencies and other entities
1 Agency/Group/Organization San Bernardino County Housing Authority
Agency/Group/Organization Type Public Housing Authority
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Housing Needs Assessment
Public Housing
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted via personal call,
emails outreach, data validation and the web-based
survey.
2 Agency/Group/Organization Inland Fair Housing and Mediation Board (IFHMB)
Agency/Group/Organization Type Service – Fair Housing
Services - Housing
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Housing Needs Assessment
Market Analysis
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach,
the web-based survey and the Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA).
3 Agency/Group/Organization San Bernardino County Department of Behavioral
Health
Agency/Group/Organization Type Publicly funded institution / System of care
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Public Health
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach
and the web-based survey.
4 Agency/Group/Organization YMCA
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Children
Services - Seniors
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Non-Housing Community Development
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach,
the web-based survey and the Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA).
Page 471
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 13 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
5 Agency/Group/Organization House of Ruth
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Victims of Domestic Violence
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Non-Homeless Special Needs
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach,
the web-based survey and the Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA).
6 Agency/Group/Organization Family Service Association
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Health
Services - Seniors
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Non-Housing Community Development
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach,
the web-based survey and the Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA).
7 Agency/Group/Organization Foothill Family Shelter
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Homeless
Services - Housing
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Homeless Needs – Families with Children
Homeless Needs – Chronically Homeless
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach,
the web-based survey and the Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA).
8 Agency/Group/Organization Inland Valley Hope Partners (SOVA)
Agency/Group/Organization Type Homeless Needs – Families with Children (at risk of
homelessness)
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Non-Housing Community Development
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach,
the web-based survey and the Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA).
Page 472
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 14 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
9 Agency/Group/Organization Inland Regional Center
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Persons with Disabilities
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Non-Housing Community Development
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach
and the web-based survey.
10 Agency/Group/Organization Foothill AIDS Project
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Persons with HIV/AIDS
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Non-Housing Community Development
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach
and the web-based survey.
11 Agency/Group/Organization San Bernardino County Homeless Partnership
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services - Homeless
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Homelessness Strategy
Homeless Needs – Chronically Homeless
Homeless Needs – Families with Children
Homeless Needs – Veterans
Homeless Needs – Unaccompanied youth
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach
and the web-based survey.
12 Agency/Group/Organization Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce
Agency/Group/Organization Type Business and Civic Leaders
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Economic Development
Market Analysis
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach
and the web-based survey.
Page 473
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 15 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
13 Agency/Group/Organization Chaffey College
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Education
Services - Employment
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Non-Housing Community Development
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach
and the web-based survey.
14 Agency/Group/Organization Rancho Cucamonga City Manager's Office
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Health
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Non-Housing Community Development
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach,
the web-based survey and the Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA).
15 Agency/Group/Organization Rancho Cucamonga Unified School District
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Children
Services – Education
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Non-Housing Community Development
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach
and the web-based survey.
16 Agency/Group/Organization Inland Empire Economic Partnership (IEEP)
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Employment
Regional Organization
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Non-Housing Community Development
Economic Development
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach
and the web-based survey.
Page 474
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 16 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
17 Agency/Group/Organization San Bernardino County Workforce Investment Board
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Employment
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Economic Development
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach
and the web-based survey.
18 Agency/Group/Organization Inland Empire Regional Broadband Consortium
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Broadband Advocates
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Broadband Needs
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach
and the web-based survey.
19 Agency/Group/Organization FEMA
Agency/Group/Organization Type Emergency/Floodplain Management
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Hazard Mitigation
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach
and the web-based survey.
20 Agency/Group/Organization Northtown Housing Development
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Seniors
Services – Youth
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Non-Housing Community Development
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach,
the web-based survey and the Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA).
Page 475
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 17 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
21 Agency/Group/Organization Heritage Farmer's Markets
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services – Health and Wellness
Economic Development
What section of the Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
Non-Housing Community Development
How was the Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
The organization was consulted by email outreach,
the web-based survey and the Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA).
Table 3 - Agencies, groups, organizations who participated
Identify any Agency Types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting
The City maintains a list of agencies, organizations and other stakeholders that have expressed an interest
in the City's CDBG programs and invited representatives from each entity to participate at multiple points in
the planning process. All agencies were strongly encouraged to attend the community meetings and
participate in surveys.
Any agency or organization that was not consulted and would like to be included in the City's list of
stakeholders, the agency or organization may contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750.
Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan
Name of Plan Lead
Organization
How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the
goals of each plan?
Continuum of Care San Bernardino
County
Consultation with San Bernardino County indicates the
City's public service strategy in this Consolidated Plan is
consistent with the CoC's strategies.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga 2014-
2021 Housing Element
(Updated draft 2021-2019
Housing Element)
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Strategic Plan goals are consistent with Housing Element
policies and goals with respect to affordable housing,
housing preservation and furthering fair housing choice.
San Bernardino County
HOME Consortium
San Bernardino
County
Coordination with the San Bernardino County Community
Development and Housing Department shows this
Consolidated Plan is consistent with the HOME
Consortium's strategies and goals.
Table 4 - Other local / regional / federal planning efforts
Page 476
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 18 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Describe cooperation and coordination with other public entities, including the State and any adjacent units
of general local government, in the implementation of the Consolidated Plan (91.215(l))
To enhance coordination among the CoC, public and assisted housing providers and private and
governmental health, mental health and service agencies, the City invited each of these entities to provide
input on the needs of the community in the development of this Consolidated Plan.
The Planning Department works with subrecipients of CDBG funds to ensure a coordinated effort among
service agencies in the region to address the needs of the City’s residents, including but not limited to,
chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families,
unaccompanied youth, and persons who were recently homeless but now living in permanent housing. To
promote economic opportunities for low-income residents, the City coordinates with subrecipient social
service agencies, businesses and housing developers to ensure that where there are job opportunities for
low-income people in connection with HUD-assisted projects, information is disseminated through
appropriate channels consistent with the objectives of Section 3 of the Housing and Community Development
Act of 1968.
Page 477
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 19 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
AP-12 Participation – 91.105, 91.200(c)
1. Summary of citizen participation process/Efforts made to broaden citizen participation
The City established and followed a process for the development of the five-year Consolidated Plan that
included broad participation from the community. These activities were coordinated and implemented by the
Planning Department.
To assist in the identification of priority needs in the City, a survey was prepared and distributed to residents
of the City to solicit resident input in the prioritization of needs related to community services, community
facilities, infrastructure, neighborhood services, special needs services, businesses and jobs, and housing.
The surveys were available online and were also made available at various public facilities.
Two community meetings to discuss the housing and community development needs in the community were
held on September 19, 2019, and October 19, 2019. At each step in the process, the City was careful to
ensure that low- and moderate-income residents, members of minority groups, agencies involved in the
provision of services to these populations, and others who are directly impacted by the programs and
activities supported by the Consolidated Plan programs had the opportunity to be actively involved.
Two public hearings were held at different stages in the development of the Consolidated Plan. The first
public hearing before the City Council on September 18, 2019, focused on the Citizen Participation Plan.
The second public hearing was held on April 15, 2020, before the City Council to receive comments on the
draft 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, and 2020-2024 Analysis of Impediments
to Fair Housing Choice.
To satisfy the federal requirements at 24 CFR 91.105(e)(1)(ii), the City held two public hearings to obtain
residents' views on housing and community development needs, development of proposed activities,
proposed strategies and actions for affirmatively furthering fair housing, and a review of program
performance. The City of Rancho Cucamonga convened the first public hearing on September 15, 2021, to
receive comments regarding program performance. A draft of the 2020-2021 Consolidated Annual
Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) was made available for public review and comment from
August 27, 2021, to September 15, 2021. No public comments were received.
Subsequently, the City made the draft 2022-2023 Action Plan available for public review and comment from
March 18, 2022, to April 20, 2022. Residents were invited to review the draft Action Plan and to attend the
Public Hearing on April 20, 2022 or submit written comments concerning the housing and community
development needs, proposed projects and activities in the Action Plan, as well as proposed strategies and
actions for affirmatively furthering fair housing. No public comments were received.
During the development of the 2022-2023 Action Plan, the City solicited applications from various non-profit
organizations and City Departments for the provision of fair housing services, public services, and community
and economic development projects. Applications received by the January 21, 2022, deadline were
evaluated for eligibility and funding recommendations.
Page 478
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 20 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Citizen Participation Outreach
Sort
Order
Mode of
Outreach Target of Outreach Summary of
Response/attendance
Summary of
Comments received
Summary of
comments not
accepted and
reasons
URL (If
applicable)
1 News-
paper Ad
Non-targeted/
broad community
Newspaper ad published on
August 16, 2019, in the Inland
Valley Daily Bulletin announcing
the availability of the draft Citizen
Participation Plan for a 30-day
public review and comment
period to include a public
hearing before the Rancho
Cucamonga City Council on
September 18, 2019.
No comments were
received.
Not applicable. Not
applicable.
2 Public
Hearing
Minorities
Non-English Speaking -
Specify other language:
Any other language
Persons with disabilities
Non-targeted/broad
community
Residents of Public and
Assisted Housing
A public hearing was held before
the Rancho Cucamonga City
Council on September 18, 2019,
to receive input on the draft
Citizen Participation Plan. This
meeting took place prior to the
publication of the draft 2020-
2024 Consolidated Plan for
public review and comment.
No comments were
received.
No comments
were received.
Not
applicable.
Page 479
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 21 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Sort
Order
Mode of
Outreach Target of Outreach Summary of
Response/attendance
Summary of
Comments received
Summary of
comments not
accepted and
reasons
URL (If
applicable)
3 Flyers Non-targeted/broad
community
The 2020-2024 Consolidated
Plan flyer was disseminated in
paper and electronic formats, in
both English and Spanish,
announcing two Community
Meetings to receive input on the
preparation of the City's 2020-
2024 Consolidated Plan and the
2020-2021 Action Plan.
No comments were
received.
No comments
were received.
Not
applicable.
4 Public
Meeting
Minorities
Persons with disabilities
Non-targeted/broad
community
Residents of Public and
Assisted Housing
Publicly noticed Community
Meeting on September 19,
2019, at 6:00 p.m. at Central
Park – 11200 Base Line Road.
Residents in
attendance received a
presentation on the
Consolidated Plan and
discussed housing
and community
development needs
with Planning
Department Staff.
All comments
were accepted.
Not
applicable.
5 Public
Meeting
Minorities
Persons with disabilities
Non-targeted/broad
community
Residents of Public and
Assisted Housing
Publicly-noticed Community
Meeting on October 19, 2019, at
10:00 a.m. at the RC Family
Resource Center – 9791 Arrow
Route.
Residents in
attendance received a
presentation on the
Consolidated Plan and
discussed housing
and community
development needs
with Planning
Department Staff.
All comments
were accepted.
Not
applicable.
Page 480
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 22 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Sort
Order
Mode of
Outreach Target of Outreach Summary of
Response/attendance
Summary of
Comments received
Summary of
comments not
accepted and
reasons
URL (If
applicable)
6 Internet
Outreach
Non-targeted/broad
community
The 2020-2024 Consolidated
Plan Survey was available online
and in paper format at various
City facilities from September
17, 2019, to November 26,
2019. The City advised residents
and stakeholders of the
availability of the survey via email
to stakeholders, posting on the
City website, Facebook,
Nextdoor, announcements at
City Council meetings, and
during the Community Meetings.
The purpose of the
survey was to allow all
residents and
stakeholders the
opportunity to provide
their assessment of
the level of need in
Rancho Cucamonga
for a variety of
housing, community
and economic
development
activities.
In total, 470 residents
and stakeholders
completed the survey.
All survey
responses were
accepted.
Not
applicable.
Page 481
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 23 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Sort
Order
Mode of
Outreach Target of Outreach Summary of
Response/attendance
Summary of
Comments received
Summary of
comments not
accepted and
reasons
URL (If
applicable)
7 Newspaper
Ad
Non-targeted/broad
community
Newspaper ad published on
March 12, 2020, in the Inland
Valley Daily Bulletin announcing
the availability of the draft 2020-
2024 Consolidated Plan, draft
2020-2021 Annual Action Plan,
and draft 2020-2024 Analysis of
Impediments to Fair Housing for
a 30-day public review and
comment period to include a
public hearing before the
Rancho Cucamonga City
Council on April 15, 2020.
No comments were
received.
No comments
were received.
Not
applicable.
8 Public
Hearing
Minorities
Non-English Speaking -
Specify other language:
Any other language
Persons with disabilities
Non-targeted/broad
community
Residents of Public and
Assisted Housing
Public hearing before the
Rancho Cucamonga City
Council on April 15, 2020, to
receive comments on the draft
2020-2024 Analysis of
Impediments to Fair Housing,
2020-2024 Consolidated Plan
and draft 2020-2021 Annual
Action Plan prior to adoption and
submission to HUD.
No comments were
received.
No comments
were received.
Not
applicable.
Page 482
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 24 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Sort
Order
Mode of
Outreach Target of Outreach Summary of
Response/attendance
Summary of
Comments received
Summary of
comments not
accepted and
reasons
URL (If
applicable)
9 Newspaper
Ad
Non-targeted/broad
community
Notice of the 15-day public
review and comment period for
the draft 2019-2020
Consolidated Annual
Performance and Evaluation
Report (CAPER). The public
notice invited interested
residents to review the draft
documents. Residents were also
invited to a public hearing to
provide oral comments before
the Rancho Cucamonga City
Council on December 16, 2020.
No comments were
received.
No comments
were received.
Not
applicable.
10 Public
Hearing
Minorities
Non-English Speaking -
Specify other language:
Any other language
Persons with disabilities
Non-targeted/broad
community
Residents of Public and
Assisted Housing
Public hearing before the
Rancho Cucamonga City
Council on December 16, 2020,
at 7:00 p.m. to receive
comments on the draft 2019-
2020 Consolidated Annual
Performance and Evaluation
Report (CAPER) prior to
adoption and submission to
HUD.
No comments were
received.
No comments
were received.
Not
applicable
Page 483
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 25 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Sort
Order
Mode of
Outreach Target of Outreach Summary of
Response/attendance
Summary of
Comments received
Summary of
comments not
accepted and
reasons
URL (If
applicable)
11 Newspaper
Ad
Non-targeted/broad
community
Notice of the 30-day public
review and comment period for
the draft 2021-2022 Action Plan.
The public notice invited
interested residents to review
the draft documents. Residents
were also invited to a public
hearing to provide oral
comments before the Rancho
Cucamonga City Council on May
5, 2021.
No comments were
received.
No comments
were received.
Not
applicable.
12 Public
Hearing
Minorities
Non-English Speaking -
Specify other language:
Any other language
Persons with disabilities
Non-targeted/broad
community
Residents of Public and
Assisted Housing
Public hearing before the
Rancho Cucamonga City
Council on May 5, 2021, at 7:00
p.m. to receive comments on the
draft 2021-2022 Annual Action
Plan prior to adoption and
submission to HUD.
No comments were
received.
No comments
were received.
Not
applicable
Page 484
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 26 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Sort
Order
Mode of
Outreach Target of Outreach Summary of
Response/attendance
Summary of
Comments received
Summary of
comments not
accepted and
reasons
URL (If
applicable)
13 Newspaper
Ad
Non-targeted/broad
community
Notice of the 15-day public
review and comment period for
the draft 2020-2021
Consolidated Annual
Performance and Evaluation
Report (CAPER). The public
notice invited interested
residents to review the draft
documents. Residents were also
invited to a public hearing to
provide oral comments before
the Rancho Cucamonga City
Council on September 15, 2022.
No comments were
received.
No comments
were received.
Not
applicable.
14 Public
Hearing
Minorities
Non-English Speaking -
Specify other language:
Any other language
Persons with disabilities
Non-targeted/broad
community
Residents of Public and
Assisted Housing
Public hearing before the
Rancho Cucamonga City
Council on September 15, 2021,
at 7:00 p.m. to receive
comments on the draft 2020-
2021 Consolidated Annual
Performance and Evaluation
Report (CAPER) prior to
adoption and submission to
HUD.
No comments were
received.
No comments
were received.
Not
applicable
Page 485
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 27 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Sort
Order
Mode of
Outreach Target of Outreach Summary of
Response/attendance
Summary of
Comments received
Summary of
comments not
accepted and
reasons
URL (If
applicable)
15 Newspaper
Ad
Non-targeted/broad
community
Notice of the 30-day public
review and comment period for
the draft 2022-2023 Action Plan.
The public notice invited
interested residents to review
the draft documents. Residents
were also invited to a public
hearing to provide oral
comments before the Rancho
Cucamonga City Council on
April 20, 2022.
No comments were
received.
No comments
were received.
Not
applicable.
16 Public
Hearing
Minorities
Non-English Speaking -
Specify other language:
Any other language
Persons with disabilities
Non-targeted/broad
community
Residents of Public and
Assisted Housing
Public hearing before the
Rancho Cucamonga City
Council on April 20, 2022, at
7:00 p.m. to receive comments
on the draft 2022-2023 Annual
Action Plan prior to adoption and
submission to HUD.
No comments were
received.
No comments
were received.
Not
applicable
Table 5 – Citizen Participation Outreach
Page 486
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 28 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Expected Resources
AP-15 Expected Resources – 91.220(c)(1,2)
Introduction
The projects and activities included in the 2022-2023 Action Plan are based on resources that are reasonably anticipated to be available to
the City from federal, state, local and private sources from July 1, 2022, through June 30, 2023. The actual resources available to support
activities during the implementation of the remainder of the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan may vary significantly due to factors outside of
the City's control. For example, HUD formula grant allocations are subject to change each year based on a number of factors such as the
amount of the national appropriation, changes in ACS population data applied to the CPD grant formulas, statutory changes to the CPD
grant formulas, the addition or removal of entitlements receiving a particular CPD grant and the availability of reallocated funds. Additionally,
state, local and private resources will vary significantly depending on the economic conditions.
For the 2022-2023 Program Year, the City has been informed by HUD that it will receive $1,070,323 in CDBG funds.
Anticipated Resources
Program Source of
Funds Uses of Funds
Expected Amount Available Year 3 Expected
Amount
Available
Remainder of
ConPlan
$
Narrative Description
Annual
Allocation:
$
Program
Income:
$
Prior Year
Resources: $
Total:
$
CDBG public -
federal
Acquisition
Admin and Planning
Economic Development
Housing
Public Improvements
Public Services
$1,070,323 $0 $0 $1,070,323 $2,140,646
The expected
amount available for
the remainder of the
Consolidated Plan
period assumes level
funding in future
years.
Table 6 - Expected Resources – Priority Table
Page 487
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 29 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds),
including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied
As a City with substantial housing and community development needs, Rancho Cucamonga needs to
leverage its CDBG entitlement grants with a variety of funding resources in order to maximize the
effectiveness of available funds. The City's former Redevelopment Agency was the City's primary non-federal
source of leveraged funds. With the elimination of the City's Redevelopment Agency, the City's ability to
leverage federal funds has been substantially reduced.
Since the initial planning and programming of these resources, the Planning Department has worked closely
with other City departments as well as County, State, and Federal partners to identify other available
resources authorized through the CARES Act, the Small Business Administration (SBA), and Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) that may be leveraged to maximize the impact of the CDBG and
CDBG-CV resources.
Federal Resources
• Continuum of Care (CoC) Program
• HUD Veterans Affairs supportive Housing (HUD-VASH)
• Supportive Housing for the Elderly (Section 202)
• Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities (Section 811)
• Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)
• Youthbuild
• Federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program
• Department of Transportation Grants
• Department of Energy Grants
• Federal Highway Administration
• Emergency Solutions Grant
• HOME Investment Partnerships
• CARES Act
• Project Homekey
State Resources
• State Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program
• Building Equity and Growth in Neighborhoods Program (BEGIN)
• CalHome Program
• Multifamily Housing Program (MHP)
• Housing Related Parks Grant
• CalHFA Single and Multi-Family Program
• Mental Health Service Act (MHSA) Funding
• Prop 47 – Board of State & Community Corrections
Page 488
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 30 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
• Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program
• Homeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP)
• Project Roomkey
Local Resources
• San Bernardino County Homeless Partnership (SBCHP)
• Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino (HACSB)
• Southern California Home Financing Authority (SCHFA) Funding
• San Bernardino County Continuum of Care Program
• General Fund
Private Resources
• Federal Home Loan Bank Affordable Housing Program (AHP)
• Community Reinvestment Act Programs
• United Way Funding
• Private Contributions
HOME Matching Requirements
The City does not receive HOME or ESG funds as part of its entitlement allocation. The amount of matching,
is therefore, not applicable for the 2022-2023 Action Plan.
If appropriate, describe publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to
address the needs identified in the plan
In December 2011, the California Supreme Court upheld Assembly Bill 1X 26, which barred Redevelopment
Agencies from engaging in new business and provided for their windup and dissolution. In the last five years,
the elimination of the Redevelopment Agencies has resulted in the loss of a crucial resource for the
development and preservation of affordable housing. This was the most significant public policy change
impacting affordable housing and residential investment. While there are mechanisms whereby certain
affordable housing assets are tied to the former Redevelopment Agencies (Successor Agencies) that may
be utilized today, these resources are finite and scarce.
As of the execution of this document, there are currently no publicly owned land or property located within
the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan. As such, any land or property
necessary to address the needs in the Consolidated Plan would need to be acquired using HUD grant funds
or other resources.
Page 489
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 31 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Discussion
During July 2022 through June 2023, the City will rely on other public and private funding, including but not
limited to:
• Low-Income Housing Tax Credits
• Project-based Section 8 certificates
• Project financing at favorable interest rates from local lenders
• Private market real estate investments
• Market rate housing that subsidizes affordable units on the same development site to enhance the
availability, affordability and sustainability of affordable housing.
Along with leveraged dollars, the City expects to spend approximately $1,070,323 of CDBG funds during
the 2022-2023 program year on public service, housing preservation and public facility and infrastructure
improvement activities that promote a suitable living environment and decent housing.
Page 490
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 32 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Annual Goals and Objectives
AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives
Goals Summary Information
Sort
Order Goal Name Start Year End Year Category Geographic
Area Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator
1 Fair Housing
Services 2022 2023 Affordable
Housing Citywide
Ensure equal access
to housing
opportunities
$20,000 Other: 233 people
2 Public Services 2022 2023
Non-Housing
Community
Development
Citywide
Provide public
services for low- and
moderate-income
residents
$160,548
Public service activities
other than low/mod
income housing benefit:
2,514 people
Homeless Person
Overnight Shelter: 85
persons assisted
Homelessness Prevention:
50 persons assisted
3
Affordable
Housing
Preservation
2022 2023 Affordable
Housing Citywide Preserve the supply
of affordable housing $330,011
Homeowner housing
rehabilitation: 12 housing
units
4
Public Facilities
and Infrastructure
Improvements
2022 2023
Non-Housing
Community
Development
Citywide/CDBG
Eligible
Areas/Slum &
Blight Analysis
Improve public
facilities and
infrastructure
Address material
barriers to
accessibility
$365,700
Public facility or
infrastructure activity other
than low/mod income
housing benefit: 17,555
people
5
Program Planning
and
Administration
2022 2023 Other Citywide All $194,064 Other: 1
Table 7 – Goals Summary
Page 491
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 33 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Goal Descriptions
1 Goal Name Fair Housing Services
Goal
Description
Affirmatively further fair housing choice through the provision of fair housing education,
counseling, anti-discrimination and landlord-tenant mediation services.
2 Goal Name Public Services
Goal
Description
Provide public services for low- and moderate-income residents including, but not
limited to, those concerned with health, fitness, nutrition, education, transportation and
recreation for children, youth and families living in Rancho Cucamonga. Additionally,
services for special needs populations such as senior services, support for those
experiencing homelessness or at risk of becoming homeless, as well as victims of
domestic violence.
3 Goal Name Affordable Housing Preservation
Goal
Description
Preserve the quality of existing affordable housing stock occupied by low- and
moderate-income households through housing rehabilitation activities.
4 Goal Name Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements
Goal
Description
Improve City of Rancho Cucamonga public facilities and infrastructure to benefit low-
and moderate-income people or those presumed under HUD regulations to be low- and
moderate-income such as elderly people and disabled adults as well as residents of
low- and moderate-income housing. This strategy includes the improvement of
sidewalks and wheelchair ramps to address materials barriers to accessibility.
5 Goal Name Program Planning and Administration
Goal
Description
CDBG program planning and administration.
Page 492
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 34 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
AP-35 Projects – 91.220(d)
Introduction
To address the high priority needs identified in the Strategic Plan to the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, the
City will invest CDBG funds in projects that provide fair housing services, provide public services to low- and
moderate-income residents, preserve affordable housing and improve the City's public facilities and
infrastructure. Together, these projects will address the housing, community and economic development
needs of Rancho Cucamonga residents-particularly those residents residing in the low- and moderate-
income areas.
Projects
# Project Name
1 Fair Housing Services
2 Public Services
3 Affordable Housing Preservation
4 Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements
5 CDBG Administration
Table 8 - Project Information
Describe the reasons for allocation priorities and any obstacles to addressing underserved needs
Based on the Strategic Plan, the City is allocating 67 percent of its CDBG funds (excluding CDBG
administration) for program year 2022-2023 projects and activities that benefit low- and moderate-income
people. Due to the nature of the projects and activities to be undertaken, investments in projects concerning
public services may be limited to the CDBG low- and moderate-income areas while other projects and
activities benefit low- and moderate-income limited clientele and are available citywide. During the 2022-
2023 program year, the City will be allocating $290,000 towards the Pecan and Whittram Street Improvement
Project which will be addressing the slum and blight national objective.
The primary obstacles to meeting the underserved needs of low- and moderate-income people include lack
of funding from federal, state and other local sources, the high cost of housing that is not affordable to low-
income people and the lack of availability of home improvement financing in the private lending industry. To
address these obstacles, the City is investing CDBG funds through the 2022-2023 Action Plan in projects
that provide loans to low- and moderate-income homeowners for home improvements, provide public
services to low- and moderate-income residents, and improve public facilities and infrastructure.
Page 493
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 35 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
AP-38 Project Summary
Project Summary Information
1 Project Name
Fair Housing Services
Target Area
Citywide
Goals Supported
Fair Housing Services
Needs Addressed
Ensure equal access to housing opportunities
Funding
CDBG:
Description Affirmatively further fair housing choice through the provision of fair housing
education, counseling, anti-discrimination, and landlord-tenant mediation services.
Target Date
6/30/2023
Estimate the
number and type of
families that will
benefit from the
proposed activities
Approximately 233 people will benefit from this activity
Location
Description
Citywide
Planned Activities Inland Fair Housing and Mediation Board: Fair Housing Services (233 people) -
$20,000
Page 494
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 36 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
2 Project Name Public Services
Target Area Citywide
Goals Supported Public Services
Needs Addressed Provide public services for low- and moderate-income residents
Funding CDBG: $160,548
Description Provide public services for low- and moderate-income residents including senior
citizens, families and youth including but not limited to those concerned with food,
essential services, transportation, health and domestic violence services.
Target Date 6/30/2023
Estimate the
number and type of
families that will
benefit from the
proposed activities
Approximately 2,649 people will benefit from this activity.
Location
Description Citywide
Planned Activities Foothill Family Center: Housing and Food Security Program (85 people) - $15,000
Inland Valley Hope Partners: Food Security/Family Stabilization Program (224
people) - $12,224
House of Ruth: Domestic Violence Services and Preventions Program (90 people)
- $12,224
Family Service Association: Senior Nutrition Program (530 people) - $15,000
Impact Southern California: Homeless Prevention/Rapid Rehousing Program (50
people) - $25,000
Northtown Housing Development Corporation: Senior Food Bank Meal Program
(300 people) - $15,500
CMO: Farmer’s Market Partnership (60 people) - $17,000
CMO: Cocinando con Amigos Saludables y Alegres (CASA) or the Cooking with
Healthy and Happy Friends Program (150 people) - $12,000
CSD: Jane Penny LINK Program (60 people) - $9,600
CSD: Financial Assistance Program (100 people) - $12,000
PW: Graffiti Removal Program (1,000 people) – $15,000
Page 495
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 37 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
3 Project Name
Affordable Housing Preservation
Target Area
Citywide
Goals Supported
Affordable Housing Preservation
Needs Addressed
Preserve the supply of affordable housing
Funding
CDBG: $330,011
Description The City has an existing Housing Rehabilitation Program geared towards the
preservation of the quality of existing affordable housing stock occupied by low-
and moderate-income households.
Target Date
6/30/2023
Estimate the
number and type of
families that will
benefit from the
proposed activities
Approximately 12 household housing units will be rehabilitated
Location
Description
Citywide
Planned Activities Housing Rehabilitation Program (12 household housing units) - $330,011
Page 496
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 38 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
4 Project Name
Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements
Target Area
Citywide, CDBG Eligible Areas, Slum & Blight Analysis
Goals Supported
Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements
Needs Addressed Improve public facilities and infrastructure; Address material barriers to
accessibility.
Funding
CDBG: $365,700
Description Improve City of Rancho Cucamonga public facilities and infrastructure to
benefit low- and moderate-income people or those presumed under HUD
regulations to be low- and moderate-income such as elderly people and
disabled adults as well as residents of low- and moderate-income housing. This
strategy includes the improvement of sidewalks and wheelchair ramps to
address materials barriers to accessibility.
Target Date
6/30/2023
Estimate the
number and type of
families that will
benefit from the
proposed activities
Approximately 17,555 persons will benefit from this activity.
Location
Description
Citywide
Planned Activities PW: Sidewalk Grinding and Wheelchair Ramps Project (1,000 people) - $45,700
PW: Pecan and Whittram Street Improvement Project (1,000 people) - $290,000
PW: 21/22 Concrete Rehabilitation Project (15,555 people) - $30,000
Page 497
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 39 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
5 Project Name
Program Planning and Administration
Target Area
Citywide
Goals Supported
All
Needs Addressed
All
Funding
CDBG: $194,064
Description Overall administration of the CDBG program which includes preparation and
submission of the Annual Action Plan and the CAPER, IDIS data entry, provision of
technical assistance, monitoring of all projects, and overall fiscal management.
Target Date
6/30/2023
Estimate the
number and type of
families that will
benefit from the
proposed activities
Other - 1
Location
Description
Citywide
Planned Activities City of Rancho Cucamonga: CDBG Program Administration - $194,064
Page 498
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 40 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
AP-50 Geographic Distribution – 91.220(f)
Description of the geographic areas of the entitlement (including areas of low-income and minority
concentration) where assistance will be directed
During the 2022-2023 program year, assistance will be primarily directed to activities that serve low- and
moderate-income residents citywide. During the program year, three (3) public service activities in the Action
Plan rely on the established low- and moderate-income area. Those are the CDBG-eligible portions of the
Graffiti Removal Program, the Farmer's Market Partnership Program as well as the CASA or Cooking with
Healthy and Happy Friends activities.
The low- and moderate-income census tract/block groups are shown on the map included in Figure 26 of
Section SP-10 of the Consolidated Plan and Appendix B of this Action Plan. According to data from the 2011-
2015 American Community Survey (ACS) provided in HUD's eCon Planning Suite, the City is considered an
"exception grantee" with an exception percentage of 37.13. This percentage represents the minimum
percentage of low- and moderate-income persons that must reside in the service area of an area benefit
activity for the activity to be assisted with CDBG funds.
Geographic Distribution
Target Area Percentage of Funds
Citywide 66%
CDBG Eligible Areas 7%
Slum & Blight Analysis 27%
Table 9 - Geographic Distribution
Rationale for the priorities for allocating investments geographically
For the 2022-2023 program year, the City will invest $1,070,323 of CDBG funds that will benefit low- and
moderate-income people throughout the City. Of this amount, approximately $44,000, or 4.1 percent, of all
resources will be invested in public service activities that exclusively benefit residents of the L/M Income
Census Tract/Block Groups. Due to the nature of the projects and activities to be undertaken, investments
in projects and activities such as CASA, Graffiti Removal and the Farmer's Market are generally limited to the
eligible low- and moderate-income areas, while other projects and activities that benefit low- and moderate-
income limited clientele are available citywide. During the 2022-2023 program year, the City will allocate
$290,000 towards the Pecan and Whittram Street Improvement Project which will address the slum & blight
national objective.
Page 499
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 41 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Discussion
The City is allocating 67 percent of its non-administrative CDBG funds for program year 2022-2023 to
projects and activities that benefit low- and moderate-income people throughout the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
Page 500
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 42 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Affordable Housing
AP-75 Barriers to Affordable Housing
Introduction
A barrier to affordable housing is a public policy or nongovernmental condition that constrains the
development or rehabilitation of affordable housing, such as land use controls, property taxes, state prevailing
wage requirements, environmental protection, cost of land and availability of monetary resources. Barriers
to affordable housing are distinguished from impediments to fair housing choice in the sense that barriers are
lawful and impediments to fair housing choice are usually unlawful.
Based on information gathered during community meetings, the Consolidated Plan Survey, the 2013-2021
Housing Element (draft 2021-2029 Housing Element) and market analysis, the primary barriers to affordable
housing in Rancho Cucamonga are housing affordability and the lack of monetary resources necessary to
develop and sustain affordable housing. The two barriers are related in the sense that demand for affordable
housing exceeds the supply and insufficient resources are available to increase the supply of affordable
housing to meet demand.
Actions it planned to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to
affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building codes,
fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment
In the development of the 2013-2021 Housing Element, the City evaluated significant public policies affecting
affordable housing development such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances,
building codes, fees and charges and growth limitations. Based on this evaluation, the City determined that
it has taken all necessary steps to ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that may have been a
barrier to affordable housing. Moreover, the City is actively engaged with affordable housing developers
concerning the siting of affordable housing and ensuring that the entitlement process runs smoothly from
inception to completion. Action plans identified in the City’s draft 2021-2029 Housing Element include but
are not limited to:
• Continue to promote the conservation of mobile home parks through implementation of the Mobile
Home Accord (Program HE-7) that serves as a rent stabilization agreement between the City and
mobile home park owners, implementation of the Mobile Home Rental Assistance (Program HE-8)
that provides a monthly rental subsidy to low-income mobile home households, and through the
enforcement of Title 24 as it applies to mobile homes to ensure mobile homes meet applicable
building code requirements.
• Develop a procedure in 2022 to monitor the development of vacant and nonvacant sites in the sites
inventory and ensure that adequate sites are available to meet the remaining RHNA by income
category throughout the 6th cycle planning period.
• Explore, in 2023, a system that establishes target densities by land use district and an in-lieu fee
system that requires developers to pay a fee if the proposed projects fall below the targeted densities.
Page 501
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 43 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
• Develop incentives and tools to facilitate ADU construction in 2022. Incentives may include:
o Fee waivers or reductions beyond State requirement;
o Pre-approved site/floor plans;
o Website information on resources and technical assistance;
o Guidance handbook for property owners looking to construct an ADU.
• Provide fee underwriting, fee deferral, public improvements, and/or permit fast-tracking for housing
affordable to lower income households, prioritizing projects that include units affordable to extremely
low-income households.
• Continue to evaluate and improve the permit processing procedures to facilitate residential
development.
• Continue to study the feasibility of an inclusionary housing ordinance in 2022-2023.
• Update the Development Code by the end of 2022 to address the provision of special needs housing.
• Update the Development Code by the end of 2022 to incorporate the new density bonus provisions.
Key improvements and bonuses included to help increase the development of affordable housing include but
are not limited to:
• Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) can provide an importance source of affordable housing for persons
and families of low and moderate income. An ADU is defined as “an attached or detached residential
dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. It shall
include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation on the same parcel
as a single-family or multi-family dwelling is situated”. The City adopted an updated accessory
dwelling unit (ADU) ordinance in 2020 which complies with State requirements. Per the ordinance,
ADUs are permitted by-right in any zone in which residential development in permitted and on any
parcel with an existing or proposed single or multi-family residence.
• A Housing Program has been added to update Development Code Chapter 17.46 to comply with the
new State provisions related to affordable housing density bonuses. The City's Affordable Housing
Incentives/Density Bonus Provisions assist in the development of affordable housing opportunities in
accordance with Government Code § 65915-65918. These provisions allow a density bonus and
other regulatory concessions to provide incentives for "the production of housing for very low income,
lower income, moderate income, and senior households" to "facilitate the development of affordable
housing" within the City. The provisions function by allowing a reduction in development standards in
exchange for the development of affordable housing units. Regulatory concessions act as incentives,
which can include reduced building setbacks, reduced open space, increased lot coverage,
increased maximum building height, reduced on-site parking standards, reduced minimum building
separation requirements, or other site or construction conditions applicable to residential
development.
• To increase transparency and certainty in the development application process as required by law,
the City has a variety of tools available for developers. The City’s community Development home
page provides links to an online permit center, development fees, the development code, and other
development information at https://www.cityofrc.us/community-development.
Page 502
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 44 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
The following are the City’s goals to reduce government constraints and increase the efficiency in processing
for improving and developing housing as defined in draft 2021-2029 Housing Element:
• Development Review Process - . Consider new polices, codes, and procedures that have the
potential to reduce procedural delays, provide information early in the development process
regarding development costs, and charge only those fees necessary to adequately carry out needed
public services and improvements.
• Fee Schedule - Periodically review and update the City's fee schedule and the methodology on which
the fees are based to determine the necessary costs for providing adequate public services and
public improvements to ensure the continued health, safety, and welfare of the community.
• Development Review Process - Facilitate the development review process for new housing through
multiple techniques, including staff assistance, public information, articles in the City's newsletter,
informal meetings with applicants, and Preliminary Review applications to address technical issues
and facilitate the production of quality housing.
• Development Standards - Evaluate and adjust as appropriate residential development standards,
regulations, and processing procedures that are determined to constrain housing development,
particularly housing opportunities for lower and moderate-income households and for persons with
special needs.
Discussion
To address housing affordability and the lack of monetary resources for affordable housing, the City will
continue to leverage its CDBG funds to attract private and other available public resources to incentivize the
development of new affordable housing units and the preservation of existing affordable housing.
Page 503
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 45 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
AP-85 Other Actions – 91.220(k)
Introduction
In the implementation of the 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan, the City will invest CDBG resources to address
obstacles to meeting underserved needs, foster and maintain affordable housing, reduce lead-based paint
hazards, reduce the number of poverty-level families, develop institutional structure, and enhance
coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies.
Actions planned to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs
The primary obstacles to meeting the underserved needs of low- and moderate-income people include lack
of funding from federal, state and other local sources, and the high cost of housing that is not affordable to
low-income people. To address these obstacles, the City is investing CDBG funds through the 2022-2023
Action Plan in projects that provide assistance to low- and moderate-income residents. To address
underserved needs, the City is allocating 67 percent of its non-administrative CDBG investments for program
year 2022-2023 to projects and activities that benefit low- and moderate-income people or people presumed
under HUD regulations to be low- and moderate-income.
Actions planned to foster and maintain affordable housing
In the implementation of the 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan, the City will invest CDBG funds to preserve and
maintain affordable housing through the City's Housing Rehabilitation Program that will provide grants and
deferred loans to low- and moderate-income owners of single-family housing.
Actions planned to reduce lead-based paint hazards
The Residential Lead Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 (Title X) emphasizes prevention of childhood
lead poisoning through housing-based approaches. To reduce lead-based paint hazards, the City’s Home
Improvement Program will conduct lead-based paint testing and risk assessments for each property assisted
that was built prior to January 1, 1978 and will incorporate safe work practices or abatement into the scope
of work as required to reduce lead-based paint hazards in accordance with 24 CFR Part 35.
Actions planned to reduce the number of poverty-level families
The implementation of CDBG activities meeting the goals established in the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan-
Strategic Plan and this Annual Action Plan will help to reduce the number of poverty-level families by:
• Supporting activities that preserve the supply of decent housing that is affordable to low- and
moderate-income households
• Supporting a continuum of housing and public service programs to prevent and eliminate
homelessness
• Supporting public services for low- and moderate-income residents
Page 504
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 46 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
In addition to these local efforts, mainstream state and federal resources also contribute to reducing the
number of individuals and families in poverty. Federal programs such as the Earned Income Tax Credit and
Head Start provide a pathway out of poverty for families who are ready to pursue employment and
educational opportunities. Additionally, in California, the primary programs that assist families in poverty are
CalWORKs, CalFresh (formerly food stamps) and Medi-Cal. Together, these programs provide individuals
and families with employment assistance, subsidy for food, medical care, childcare and cash payments to
meet basic needs such as housing, nutrition and transportation. Other services are available to assist persons
suffering from substance abuse, domestic violence and mental illness.
Actions planned to develop institutional structure
The institutional delivery system in Rancho Cucamonga is high-functioning and collaborative—particularly
the relationship between local government and the non-profit sector comprised of a network of capable non-
profit organizations that are delivering a full range of services to residents. Strong City departments anchor
the administration of HUD grant programs and the housing, community and economic development activities
that are implemented by the City support and enhance this existing institutional structure. The City will
collaborate with affordable housing developers and non-profit agencies receiving CDBG funds through the
2022-2023 Annual Action Plan to ensure that the needs of low- and moderate-income residents are met as
envisioned within the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan - Strategic Plan.
Actions planned to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies
To enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies, the City will
continue consulting with and inviting the participation of a wide variety of agencies and organizations involved
in the delivery of housing and supportive services to low- and moderate-income residents in Rancho
Cucamonga. With improvements in technology, the City will expand its outreach efforts to enhance
coordination with public and private housing and social service agencies through social media platforms such
Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc.
Discussion
In the implementation of the 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan, the City will invest CDBG resources to address
obstacles to meeting underserved needs, foster and maintain affordable housing, reduce lead-based paint
hazards, reduce the number of poverty-level families, develop institutional structure and enhance
coordination between public and private social service agencies.
Page 505
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 47 - 2022 Annual Action Plan
Program Specific Requirements
AP-90 Program Specific Requirements – 91.220(l)(1,2,4)
Introduction
In the implementation of programs and activities under the 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan, the City will follow
all HUD regulations concerning the use of program income, forms of investment, overall low- and moderate-
income benefit for the CDBG program.
Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG)
Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(1)
Projects planned with all CDBG funds expected to be available during the year are identified in the Projects
Table. The following identifies program income that is available for use that is included in projects to be
carried out.
1. The total amount of program income that will have been received before the start of the next
program year and that has not yet been reprogrammed $0
2. The amount of proceeds from section 108 loan guarantees that will be used during the year to
address the priority needs and specific objectives identified in the grantee's strategic plan. $0
3. The amount of surplus funds from urban renewal settlements $0
4. The amount of any grant funds returned to the line of credit for which the planned use has not
been included in a prior statement or plan $0
5. The amount of income from float-funded activities $0
Total Program Income: $0
Other CDBG Requirements
1. The amount of urgent need activities $0
2. The estimated percentage of CDBG funds that will be used for activities that benefit persons of
low and moderate income. Overall Benefit - A consecutive period of one, two or three years may
be used to determine that a minimum overall benefit of 70% of CDBG funds is used to benefit
persons of low and moderate income. Specify the years covered that include this Annual Action
Plan. The City will meet this requirement over the 2020-2021, 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 CDBG
program years.
70%
Page 506
Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) Program
Draft 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan
Public Hearing
April 20, 2022
TOPICS
•Background
•Resources
•Action Plan
•Recommendation
BACKGROUND
CDBG
BACKGROUND
The Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG)Program is
administered by the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD).
HUD provides the annual grant on
a formula basis to cities like Rancho
Cucamonga to carry out eligible
housing,community and economic
development activities.
BACKGROUND
2020-2024 Consolidated Plan
2020-2021 Action Plan
2021-2022 Action Plan
2022-2023 Action Plan
2023-2024 Action Plan
2024-2025 Action Plan
2020-2024
Consolidated
Plan
Fair Housing
Services
Public
Services
Affordable
Housing
Preservation
Public
Facilities and
Infrastructure
Improvements
RESOURCES
CDBG
RESOURCES
CDBG
Grant
$1,070,323*
Fair Housing Services
($20,000)
Public Services
($160,548)
Affordable Housing Preservation
($330,011)
Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements
($365,700)
* Anticipated amount. HUD has not yet released the City’s 2022-2023 annual CDBG allocation. Amount also includes $194,064 for administration.
ACTION PLAN
PROPOSED USES OF CDBG FUNDS
ACTION PLAN OVERVIEW
Administration
Public Services
Capital
Improvements
Administration
Public Services
Capital Improvements
CDBG PUBLIC SERVICE NOFA
NOFA & Outreach
•Written public notice
•Direct emails to non-profit organizations
•Applicant technical assistance
Applications Received
•Received 18 applications
•12 Public Service
•2 Administration (includes Fair Housing, mandatory)
•4 Capital
Eligibility Review
•City staff review
•Reviewed based on eligibility, need, organizational capacity, funding amount requested and
proposed accomplishments
PROPOSED CDBG ACTIVITIES
$214,064Administration
•City of Rancho Cucamonga: CDBG Program Administration ($194,064)
•Inland Fair Housing and Mediation Board: Fair Housing Services ($20,000) –233 people
$160,548Public Services
•City of Rancho Cucamonga: Farmer’s Market Partnership ($17,000) –60 people
•City of Rancho Cucamonga: CASA ($12,000) –150 people
•City of Rancho Cucamonga: Jane Penny LINK Program ($9,600) –60 people
•City of Rancho Cucamonga: Financial Assistance Program ($12,000) –100 people
•City of Rancho Cucamonga: Graffiti Removal Program ($15,000) –1,000 people
•Impact Southern California: Homeless Prevention/Rapid Rehousing Program ($25,000) –50 people
•House of Ruth: Domestic Violence Services and Prevention ($12,224) –90 people
•Family Service Association: Senior Nutrition Program ($15,000) –530 people
•Foothill Family Shelter: Housing and Food Security Program ($15,000) –85 people
•Inland Valley Hope Partners: Food Security/Family Stabilization ($12,224) –224 people
•Northtown Housing Development Corporation: Senior Food Bank Meal Program ($15,500) –300 people
$695,711Capital Improvements
•City of Rancho Cucamonga: Housing Rehabilitation Program ($330,011) –12 household housing units
•City of Rancho Cucamonga: Sidewalk Grinding & Wheelchair Ramps ($45,700) –1,000 people
•City of Rancho Cucamonga: Pecan & Whittram Street Improvement Project ($290,000) –1,000 people
•City of Rancho Cucamonga: 2021/2022 Concrete Rehabilitation Project ($30,000) –15,555 people
RECOMMENDATION
NEXT STEPS
RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a public hearing to receive comments on the draft
2022-2023 Action Plan for the use of CDBG funds
Approve the 2022-2023 Action Plan and authorize the
submittal of the plan and any necessary documents to HUD
Submit approved Action Plan to HUD before May 13,2022,
deadline
Authorize the appropriation of funds for the 2022-2023 CDBG
Program