Page - 1 -
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
OF THE JURUPA VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, March 6, 2025
Regular Meeting: 7:00 p.m.
City Council Chamber
8930 Limonite Avenue, Jurupa Valley, CA 92509
1. 7:00 PM - CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL FOR REGULAR MEETING ● Brian Berkson, Mayor
● Chris Barajas, Mayor Pro Tem
● Armando Carmona, Council Member
● Veronica Sanchez, Council Member
● Guillermo Silva, Council Member
2. INVOCATION
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. RIVERSIDE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL SERVICES –
INTRODUCTION OF “PET OF THE MONTH”
A. As a courtesy to those in attendance, we ask that cell phones be turned off or set to their silent mode and that you keep talking to a minimum so that all persons can hear the comments of the public and City Council.
B. A member of the public who wishes to speak u nder Public Comments must fill out a “Speaker Card” and submit it to the City Clerk BEFORE the Mayor calls for Public Comments on an agenda item. Each agenda item up will be open for public comments before taking action. Public comments on subjects that are not on the agenda can be made during the “Public Appearance/Comments” portion of the agenda.
C. Members of the public who wish to comment on the CONSENT CALENDAR may do so during the Public Comment portion of the Agenda prior to the adoption of the Consent Calendar.
D. As a courtesy to others and to assure that each person wishing to be heard has an opportunity to speak, please limit your comments to 3 minutes.
Page - 2 -
B. JURUPA VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE UPDATE
C. HEALTHY JURUPA VALLEY UPDATE
6. PUBLIC APPEARANCE/COMMENTS
7. INTRODUCTIONS, ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, COUNCIL COMMENTS AND
ANNOUNCEMENTS
8. CITY MANAGER’S UPDATE
9. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. FEBRUARY 20, 2025 REGULAR MEETING
10. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A MOTION TO WAIVE THE READING OF
THE TITLE AND TEXT OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA
Requested Action: That the City Council waive the reading of the title and text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. In accordance with Government Code Section 34934, the title of each ordinance is included on the published agenda and a copy of the full ordinance has been available to the public online on the City’s website and will be available in print at the meeting prior to the introduction or passage of the ordinance.
COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY REMOVE ITEMS FROM TH E CONSENT
CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION, OR TO ASK QUESTIONS, OR MAKE A
COMMENT ON THE ITEM
If a Council Member wishes to vote “no” or “abstain” on a Consent Calendar item but does not wish to discuss, ask questions or make a comment, the Council Member may state that they wish to vote “no” or “abstain” on the item and the Persons wishing to address the City Council on subjects other than those listed on the Agenda are requested to do so at this time. A member of the public who wishes to speak under Public Appearance/Comments OR the Consent Calendar must fill out a “Speaker Card” and submit it to the City Clerk BEFORE the Mayor calls for Public Comments on an agenda item. When addressing the City Council, please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record. While listing your name and address is not required, it helps us to provide follow -up information to you if needed. In order to conduct a timely meeting, we ask that you keep your comments to 3 minutes. Government Code Section 54954.2 prohibits the City Council from taking action on a specific item until it appears on an agenda.
Page - 3 -
minutes and certification of the vote will show that the Council Member voted “no” or “abstain.”
B. CONSIDERATION OF CHECK REGISTER IN THE AMOUNT OF
$6,919,795.19
Requested Action: That the City Council ratify the check registers dated January 30, and February 10, 18, 21, 2025 as well as the payroll registers dated January 31, and February 14, 2025.
C. ORDINANCE NO. 2025-05
Requested Action: That the City Council conduct a second reading and adopt Ordinance No, 2025-05, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE
LEGISLATIVE BODY OF CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY COMMUNITY
FACILITIES DISTICT NO. PS 2024 -008 (PUBLIC SAFETY,
COUNTRYSIDE ESTATES) AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL
TAX THEREIN
D. CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF 2025 LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM
Requested Action: That the City Council approve the Legislative Platform for the calendar year of 2025.
E. APPROVAL OF FINANCE TRACT MAP NO. 38947 ; VERNOLA RANCH
FOR FINANCE AND CONVEYANCE PURPOSES ONLY LOCATED EAST
OF INTERSTATE 15 (I-15), WEST OF PATS RA NCH ROAD, SOUTH OF
BELLEGRAVE AVENUE, AND NORTH OF LIMONITE AVENUE
1. Requested Action: That the City Council approve the Finance Map (Tract Map No. 38947) for Finance and Conveyance purposes only.
2. Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign Finance Tract Map No. 38947.
3. Approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Subdivision Agreement and accept the surety bond for Monumentation.
F. APPROVAL OF TRACT MAP NO. 37857; LAS PALMAS LOCATED NORTH OF 45 TH STREET BETWEEN OPAL STREET AND PACIFIC AVENUE,
ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERS OF DEDICATION, APPROVAL OF
SUBDIVISION AGREEMENTS, AND ACCEPTANCE OF
IMPROVEMENT BONDS
Page - 4 -
1. Requested Action: That the City Council approve Tract Map 37857 and accept the dedication as follows:
a. Accept the real property described as an easement for street, public utility and drainage purposes together with the right of ingress and egress for emergency vehicles within Lot “A” (Majesty Lane), Lot “B” (La Brisa Street), Lot “C” (Areca Lane), Lot “D” (El Granate Street), and Lots “E” through “L”.
b. Accept the dedication for Lot “37” for basin and water quality purposes.
2. Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign Tract Map 37857.
3. Approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Subdivision Agreements; and
4. Accept the surety bonds for construction of related improvements and survey monumentation.
G. RESOLUTION DENYING THE WARMINGTON RESI DENTIAL
PROJECT LOCATED AT 7 586 JURUPA ROAD (MA2 3357);
(APPLICANT: WARMINGTON RESIDENTIAL)
Requested Action: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2025-26, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY DENYING MASTER APPLICATION NO. 23357 CONSISTING
OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38888, SITE DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT NO. 2317 2, AND DENSITY BONUS APPLICATION NO. 24001 THAT SOUGHT TO ALLOW THE SUBDIVISION OF 6.92 ACRES OF
LAND INTO 72 LOTS FOR 67 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES AT 7586 JURUPA ROAD (APN: 183-030-014), AND MAKING A FINDING THE
PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT
TO CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT SECTION 15270
SINCE THE PROJECT IS BEING DENIED (WARMINGTON
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT)
H. COMPLIANCE REPORT FOR AB 1600 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES Requested Action: That the City Council receive and file the annual compliance report for Development Impact Fees.
11. CONSIDERATION OF ANY ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT
CALENDAR
Page - 5 -
12. PUBLIC HEARING
A. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPROVAL
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR MASTER
APPLICATION NO. 25018 (MA25018) ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 25002 (ZCA25002) CONSISTING OF AN ORDINANCE ADDING
SECTIONS 9.05.103, 9.05.105, AND 9.05.108 TO THE JURUPA VALLEY
MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING AN APPLICATION PROCESS,
ENTITLEMENT PERIOD, AND APPEAL PROCESS FOR
STREAMLINED, MINISTERIAL HOUSING PROJECTS AND APPEALS
PROCESS FOR INCOMPLETENESS DETERMINATIONS UNDER THE
PERMIT STREAMLINING ACT, AND MAKING A FINDING OF
EXEMPTION UNDER CEQA
Requested Action: That the City Council conduct a public hearing, receive public testimony, and introduce and conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. 2025-07, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY ADDING SECTIONS 9.05.103, 9.05.105 AND 9.05.108 TO TITLE 9 (PLANNING AND ZONING) OF THE JURUPA VALLEY MUNICIPAL
CODE ESTABLISHING AN APPLICATION PROCESS, ENTITLEMENT
PERIOD, AND APPEALS PROCESS FOR STREAMLINED,
MINISTERIAL HOUSING PROJECTS AND AN APPEALS PROCESS
FOR INCOMPLETENESS DETERMINATIONS UNDER THE PERMIT
STREAMLINING ACT, AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION
UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
13. COUNCIL BUSINESS
A. AGREEMENT WITH UNLIMITED ENVIRONMENTAL INC., FOR THE
ABATEMENT AND DEMOLITION OF THE DILAPIDATED BUILDING
AT 6631 CLAY STREET
1. Requested Action: That the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement with Unlimited Environmental, Inc. for the demolition of the dilapidated building located at 6631 Clay Street, which poses a hazard to public safety and is in violation of local building codes; and
2. Allocate funding for the demolition and any associated costs, ensuring that the amount does not exceed $89,000 dollars for the safe removal of the structure.
Page - 6 -
14. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ORAL/WRITTEN REPORTS REGARDING
REGIONAL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
A. MAYOR BRIAN BERKSON
1. UPDATE ON THE RIVERSIDE CO UNTY TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION MEETINGS OF FEBRUARY 20 AND 21, 2025
2. UPDATE ON THE RIVERSIDE TRANIST AG ENCY BOARD OF
DIRECTORS MEETING OF FEBRUARY 27, 2025
3. UPDATE ON THE METROL INK / SOUTHERN CALIF ORNIA
REGIONAL RAIL AUTHOR ITY BOARD OF DIRECTO RS
MEETING OF FEBRUARY 28, 2025
4. UPDATE ON THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS - TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE
MEETING OF MARCH 6, 2025
B. MAYOR PRO TEM CHRIS BARAJAS
1. UPDATE ON THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE CO UNCIL OF
GOVERNMENTS EXECUTIV E COMMITTEE MEETING OF
MARCH 3, 2025
15. COUNCIL MEMBER REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
16. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT
17. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS AND COMMENTS
18. ADJOURNMENT
Adjourn to the Regular Meeting of March 20, 2025 at 7:00 p.m. at the City Council Chamber, 8930 Limonite Avenue, Jurupa Valley, CA 92509.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section 54954.2, if you need special assistance to participate in a meeting of the Jurupa Valley City Council or other services, please contact Jurupa Valley City Hall at (951) 332-6464. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.
Agendas of public meetings and any other writings distributed to all, or a major ity of, Jurupa Valley City Council Members in connection with a matter subject to discussion or consideration at an open meeting of the City Council are public records. If such writing is distributed less than 72 hours prior to a public meeting, the writing will be made available for public inspection at the City of Jurupa Valley, 8930 Limonite Avenue, Jurupa Valley, CA 92509, at the time the writing is
Page - 7 -
distributed to all, or a majority of, Jurupa Valley City Council Members. The City Council may also post the writing on its Internet website at www.jurupavalley.org.
Agendas and Minutes are posted on the City’s website at www.jurupavalley.org.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.A
-1-
MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE JURUPA VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
February 20, 2025
The meeting was held at the Jurupa Valley City Council Chamber, 8930 Limonite Avenue, Jurupa Valley, CA
1. 6:00 PM - CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL FOR STUDY SESSION ● Brian Berkson, Mayor
● Chris Barajas, Mayor Pro Tem
● Armando Carmona, Council Member
● Veronica Sanchez, Council Member
● Guillermo Silva, Council Member
Mayor Brian Berkson called the study session to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. STUDY SESSION
A. FOOD TRUCK AND STREET VENDOR REGULATIONS
Irwin Salas, Building, Safety & Code Manager, gave a presentation on food truck and street vendor regulations. He gave an overview of why the City regulates mobile food vending, which is to protect the h ealth and safety of the public , to protect the public from food borne illnesses , and to protect the public from nuisances. Mr. Salas gave an overview of the number of complaints received and the components of the proposed new enforcement program.
Joe Perez, Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director, provided additional information and responded to Council’s questions.
Marty Handley voiced concern that many of the mobile food vendors are located in high traffic areas, which would make the City liable for traffic accidents and other risks to the health and safety of residents, such as trash left behind and lack of sanitation facilities.
Ronnie Romo stated that he is the owner of Pizza Plugg . As an owner of a local business, he is required to pay several fees to operate his business as opposed to the mobile food vendors who set up near his business . He noted that the mobile businesses often leave trash behind and it is unfair to legitimate business owners who pay their fair share to operate.
Denise Romo stated that they are losing business to mobile food vendors who are not required to pay any fees. She urge d the Council to consider their plight as a mom and pop business, they are just trying to survive.
RETURN TO AGENDA
-2-
David Daneshmayeh stated that many of the mobile food vendors are not selling traceable food products that may be unsafe. He urged the Council to consider t he health and safety of the public.
Following discussion, the City Council provided input and direction.
3. 7:00 PM - CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL FOR REGULAR MEETING ● Brian Berkson, Mayor
● Chris Barajas, Mayor Pro Tem
● Armando Carmona, Council Member
● Veronica Sanchez, Council Member
● Guillermo Silva, Council Member
Mayor Brian Berkson called the regular meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
4. INVOCATION was given by Pastor Greg Rondeau, Calvary Chapel Jurupa Valley.
5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Mayor Pro Tem Chris Barajas.
6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Chris Barajas, seconded by Council Member Guillermo Silva, to approve the Agenda.
Ayes: C. Barajas, B. Berkson, A. Carmona, V. Sanchez, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
7. PRESENTATIONS
8. PUBLIC APPEARANCE/COMMENTS
Jorge Padilla stated that he purchased part of the Wal-Mart shopping center nearly a year ago. He outlined the various issues he has had working with City staff and asked that the Council assist with the development process.
Daniel Silvas voiced concern that there have been nine wildfires since Thanksgiving, which he believes are being caused by transients in the Santa Ana River. He asked for an update on the town hall meeting with Southern California Edison.
Joel Martinez spoke in support of Item 12.K, the City’s application to participate i n the Prohousing Designation Program through the California Department of Housing and Community Development as it will help to provide affordable housing.
Magdalena Pelayo stated that she was grateful for the Council’s consideration of the prohousing designation as it will provide affordable housing for Jurupa Valley’s residents
-3-
who wish to have a home of their own where they can have a vegetable garden and chicken coop. [spoke in Spanish, interpreted by Council Member Armando Carmona].
Maribel Nunez thanked Mayor Pro Tem Chris Barajas and the Council for their efforts to secure affordable housing. She presented a petition in support of the prohousin g designation.
9. INTRODUCTIONS, ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, COUNCIL COMMENTS AND
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Council Member Guillermo Silva wished his daughter a “Happy Birthday” on her 16 th birthday.
Council Member Armando Carmona discussed state housing laws, stating that whil e he supports affordable housing, he is wary of state laws that give blank checks to developers to build whatever they want. He noted that there have been over 200 housing laws passed by the state legislature that often negatively impact residents’ quality of life and these legislative changes from Sacramento are increasing.
Mayor Pro Tem Chris Barajas thanked all the local small businesses who helped support the recent soccer tournament that brought more than 10,000 people to Jurupa Valley.
10. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ORAL/WRITTEN REPORTS REGARDING
REGIONAL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
A. MAYOR BRIAN BERKSON
1. Mayor Brian Berkson gave an update on the Northwest Transportation Now Coalition meeting of February 13, 2025.
2. Mayor Brian Berkson gave an update on the Metrolink / Southern California Regional Rail Authority – Audit and Finance Committee meeting of February 14, 2025.
3. Mayor Brian Berkson gave an update on the Riverside County Transportation Commission meeting of February 20, 2025.
Pamela Blynn commented that access to reliable, affordable, and efficient transportation is a challenging issue for people who are visually impaired.
She suggested that the California Council for the Blind be invi ted to share information about this issue.
-4-
B. MAYOR PRO TEM CHRIS BARAJAS
1. Mayor Pro Tem Chris Barajas gave an update on the Western Riverside Council of Governments – Administration & Finance Committee meeting of February 12, 2025.
11. CITY MANAGER’S UPDATE
City Manager Rod Butler announced that o n February 25, 2025, the City will host a community meeting at 6:00 p.m. at the Skyview Event Center that will focus on an economic development strategy. Attendees will be encouraged to provide input on the economic needs of Jurupa Valley and how the City can best support both existing and future businesses. Spanish interpreters will be available. A community survey is available at the City’s website that seeks input from the community. He announced that a series of community meetings that will focus on the City’s Code Enforcement Division will be taking place over the next few months. These meetings are intended to provide an opportunity to meet with Planning staff and get helpful resources. T he first meeting will take place on Wednesday, March 5, 2025 at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall. He announced a town hall meeting with Southern California Edison will be held on Thursday, February 27, 2025 from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at Rubidoux High School. The first portion of the meeting will include information on the public safety power shut -offs with a public comment portion. Residents are encouraged to visit the City’s website at jurupavalley.org and RSVP prior to the town hall meeting to ensure there is sufficient capacity for the meeting.
12. SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT UPDATE
Lt. John Shulda gave an update on the Jurupa Valley Sheriff’s Department. He reported that the organized retail theft grant program has improved operational efficiency and has identified more than 286 suspects and helped recover over $10 million in stolen property.
He provided an update on a recent allied agency commercial checkpoint.
13. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. FEBRUARY 6, 2025 REGULAR MEETING
A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Chris Barajas, seconded by Council Member Guillermo Silva , to approve the Minutes of the regular meeting of February 6, 2025.
Ayes: C. Barajas, B. Berkson, A. Carmona, V. Sanchez, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
-5-
14. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A MOTION TO WAIVE THE READING OF
THE TITLE AND TEXT OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA
Requested Action: That the City Council waive the reading of the title and text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the ag enda. In accordance with Government Code Section 34934, the title of each ordinance is included on the published agenda and a copy of the full ordinance has been available to the public online on the City’s website and will be available in print at the me eting prior to the introduction or passage of the ordinance.
COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY REMOVE ITEMS FROM TH E CONSENT
CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION, OR TO ASK QUESTIONS, OR MAKE A
COMMENT ON THE ITEM
If a Council Member wishes to vote “no” or “abstain” on a Consent Calendar item but does not wish to discuss, ask questions or make a comment, the Council Member may state that they wish to vote “no” or “abstain” on the item and the minutes and certification of the vote will show that the Council Member voted “no” or “abstain.”
B. ORDINANCE NO. 2025-04
Requested Action: That the City Council conduct a second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2025-04, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE
LEGISLATIVE B ODY OF CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY COMMUNITY
FACILITIES DISTICT NO. PS 2024-012 (PUBLIC SAFETY, WEST COAST
SELF-STORAGE) AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX
THEREIN
C. MID-YEAR BUDGET AMENDMENTS FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025
Requested Action: That the City Council approve the proposed Fiscal Year 2024- 2025 Mid -Year Budget Amendments to the City’s Budget as presented in the Attachment to the staff report.
D. APPROVAL OF PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR 1.66 ACRES OF
PROPERTY AT 10968 58 TH STREET AND FINDIN G THAT THE
ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY IS E XEMPT FROM CALIFORNI A
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
-6-
1. Requested Action: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2025 -18, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
JURUPA VALLEY APPROVING THAT CERTAIN “VACANT
LAND PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND JOINT ESCROW
INSTRUCTIONS” FOR THE ACQUISITION OF 1.66 ACRES OF
LAND AT 10968 58TH STREET (APN 161 -180-033) FOR PUBLIC
PURPOSES AND FINDING THAT THIS ACTION IS EXEMPT
FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
2. Authorize the Director of Finance to make appropriate budget adjustments as necessary, based on the Resolution and the Finance Impact section of the Staff Report.
E. RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ESTABLISH CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. PS 2024 -011
(PUBLIC SAFETY, LAS PALMAS) AND TO AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF
A SPECIAL TAX WITHIN CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY COMMUNITY
FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. PS 2024 -011 (PUBLIC SAFETY, LAS PALMAS); GENERALY LOCATED ON 45 TH STREET BETWEEN OPAL
STREET AND PACIFIC AVENUE
Requested Action: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2025-19, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY TO ESTABLISH CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. PS 2024 -011 (PUBLIC
SAFETY, LAS PAL MAS) AND TO AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF A
SPECIAL TAX WITHIN CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY COMMUNITY
FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. PS 2024 -011 (PUBLIC SAFETY, LAS
PALMAS)
F. APPROVAL TO PURCH ASE TWO (2) FORD MAV ERICK HYBRID
VEHICLES
1. Requested Action: That the City Council approve the purchase of two (2) Ford Maverick Hybrid vehicles for $59,904.52, including taxes and fees.
2. That the City Council authorize the Finance Director to make any necessary budget adjustments.
-7-
G. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDING
DECEMBER 31, 2024, FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025
Requested Action: That the City Council receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ending December 31, 2024 (second quarter of Fiscal Year 2024-2025).
H. APPROVAL OF SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH
WULFF, HANSEN & CO. FOR MUNICIPAL ADVISORY AND
INVESTMENT SERVICES
Requested Action: That the City Council approve the second amendment to the original agreement with Wulff, Hansen & Co. for munici pal advisory and investment services from January 1, 2025 to December 31, 2026.
I. APPROVAL TO ADOPT THE AMENDED PROPOSED CLASSIFICATION
AND COMPENSATION SALARY SCHEDULE FOR MID -FISCAL YEAR
2024-2025 AND DEVELOP A PAY FOR PERFORMANCE PROGRAM FOR EMPLOYEES AT TOP STEP OF SALARY RANGE – REMOVED FROM
THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION
1. Requested Action: That the City Council approve the new amended classification and compensation salary schedule, including the new classification and job descripti on for Facilities and Fleet Coordinator, Range 133, $73,195.20- $98,092.80.
2. That the City Council approve the amended classification and compensation salary schedule to include a two decimal rounding calculation when calculating annual salaries.
3. That the City Council approve the recommendation to implement a 12 - month performance pay increase for employees, at the top step of salary range, who have demonstrated an exemplary performance. Employees must earn this performance pay increase each year becau se the pay is not guaranteed from year to year and is performance based.
4. Authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute the newly created job description and Pay for Performance Program including the ability to make minor non-substantive changes.
5. Adopt Resolution No. 2025-20, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
JURUPA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, TO AMEND THE
CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION SALARY SCHEDULE
TO INCLUDE THE NEW CLASSIFICATION OF FACILATIES
-8-
AND FLEET COORDINATOR AND I MPLEMENT A PAY FOR
PERFORMANCE PROGRAM FOR EMPLOYEES AT TOP STEP IN
PAY RANGE
J. FOURTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING
SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY AND KEVIN
RYAN FOR AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES, PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND RETAIL THEFT
PREVENTION COORDINATION
Requested Action: That the City Council approve the Fourth Amendment to the agreement between the City of Jurupa Valley and Kevin Ryan for American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) administrative consulting, project management services and coordination of the Organ ized Retail Theft Prevention (ORTP) Program and authorize the City Manager to execute the Fourth Amendment in substantially the form and format attached to the staff report as approved by the City Attorney.
K. AUTHORIZATION TO APPLY FOR PROHOUSING DESIGNATION
THROUGH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (HCD)
1. Requested Action: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2025 -24, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
JURUPA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING AN
APPLICATION WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR A PROHOUSING
DESIGNATION
2. Authorize the City Manager to execute any documents necessary or appropriate as required for applicatio n to and participation in the Prohousing Designation Program.
L. AMENDMENT OF CIT Y COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
CONCERNING THE ORDER OF COUNCIL BUSINESS – REMOVED
FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION
Requested Action: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2025-25, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE RULES OF PROCEDURE
AND ORDER FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Chris Barajas , seconded by Council Member Guillermo Silva to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Items 12.I and 12.L, which were removed for further discussion.
-9-
Ayes: C. Barajas, B. Berkson, A. Carmona, V. Sanchez, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
15. CONSIDERATION OF ANY ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT
CALENDAR
14.I APPROVAL TO ADOPT THE AMENDED PROPOSED CLASSIFICATION
AND COMPENSATION SALARY SCHEDULE FOR MID -FISCAL YEAR
2024-2025 AND DEVELOP A PAY FOR PERFORMANCE PROGRAM FOR
EMPLOYEES AT TOP STEP OF SALARY RANGE
Council Member Armando Carmona requested that Item 14.I be removed from the Consent Calendar for further discussion. He requested further clarification regarding the pay for performance program guidelines.
City Manager Rod Butler provided additional in formation and responded to Council’s questions.
A motion was made by Council Member Armando Carmona, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Chris Barajas, to approve the new amended classification and compensation salary schedule, including the new classification and job description for Facilities and Fleet Coordinator, Range 133, $73,195.20 - $98,092.80; approve the amended classification and compensation salary schedule to include a two decimal rounding calculation when calculating annual salaries; adopt Resolution No. 2025-20 as amended, and bring back the Pay for Performance Program guidelines for further discussion.
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-20 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, TO AMEND THE
CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION SALARY SCHEDULE TO
INCLUDE THE NEW CLASSIFICATION OF FACILATIES AND FLEET
COORDINATOR
Ayes: C. Barajas, B. Berkson, A. Carmona, V. Sanchez, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
14.L AMENDMENT OF CITY COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
CONCERNING THE ORDER OF COUNCIL BUSINESS
Mayor Brian Berkson requested that Item 14.L be removed from the Consent Calendar for further discussion.
Further discussion followed.
-10-
A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Chris Barajas , seconded by Council Member Guillermo Silva, to adopt Resolution No. 2025-25, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE RULES OF PROCEDURE
AND ORDER FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
Ayes: C. Barajas, B. Berkson, A. Carmona, V. Sanchez, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
16. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION; DECLARING THE RESULTS OF THE ELECTION; AND APPROVING
FORMATION AND LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES FOR CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. PS 2024 -008
(PUBLIC SAFETY, COUNTRYSIDE ESTATES) GENERALLY LOCATED
NORTH OF AVENUE JUAN BATISTA, SOUTH OF MAVERICK LANE,
EAST OF LIMONITE AVENUE, AND WEST OF RIVERVIEW DRIVE
Staff Report presented by Paul Toor, Director of Public Works. Mr. Toor gave an overview of the process to approve the formation and levy of special taxes for City of Jurupa Valley Community Facilities District No. PS 2024 -008 – Countryside Estates.
Mayor Brian Berkson opened the public hearing.
Denise and Ronnie Romo voiced concern about the amount of crime surrounding their Pizza Plugg business in Rubidoux. There is theft, homelessness, vandalism, and crime. Due to the illegal activity, the owners are losing business and they are seeking Council support to secure a larger police presence in the Legends marketplace.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
A motion was made by Council Member Armando Carmona , seconded by Council Member Guillermo Silva, to adopt Resolution Nos. 2025-21 and 2025- 22, entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-21 - A RESOLUTION OF FORMATION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, TO
ESTABLISH CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY COMMUNITY FACILITEIS
DISTRICT NO. PS 2024 -008 (PUBLIC SAFETY, COUNTRYSIDE
ESTATES), TO ESTAB LISH AN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT
THEREFORE, TO AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX
-11-
THEREIN, AND TO SUBMIT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN
APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT AND THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO
THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS THEREOF; AND
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-22 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCI L
OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION
AND SUBMITTING TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF CITY OF
JURUPA VALLEY COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. PS 2024 - 008 (PUBLIC SAFETY, COUNTRYSIDE ESTATES) PROPOSITIONS
REGARDING THE ESTABL ISHMENT OF AN APPROPRIATIONS
LIMIT AND THE ANNUAL LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX WITHIN THE
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT
Ayes: C. Barajas, B. Berkson, A. Carmona, V. Sanchez, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
At the request of the mayor, the Deputy City Clerk reported that one owner cast one ballot. All votes cast were in favor of the special taxes.
A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Chris Barajas , seconded by Council Member Guillermo Silva, to adopt Resolution No. 2025-23, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE RESULTS OF A SPECIAL
ELECTION IN CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT NO. PS 2024 -008 (PUBLIC SAFETY, COUNTRYSIDE
ESTATES) AND DIRECTING THE RECORDING OF A NOTICE OF
SPECIAL TAX LIEN
Ayes: C. Barajas, B. Berkson, A. Carmona, V. Sanchez, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Chris Barajas , seconded by Council Member Guillermo Silva, to introduce Ordinance No. 2025-05, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE
LEGISLATIVE BODY OF CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY COMMUNITY
FACILITIES DISTICT NO. PS 2024 -008 (PUBLIC SAFETY,
COUNTRYSIDE ESTATES) AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL
TAX THEREIN
-12-
Ayes: C. Barajas, B. Berkson, A. Carmona, V. Sanchez, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
B. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE APPROVING
MASTER APPLICATION NO. 24322 (MA24322) AND CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 22005 (CZ22005) CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 3. 06 ACRES
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LA RUE STREET AND
CANAL STREET (APN: 179 -021-001) FROM R -1 (ONE FAMILY
DWELLINGS) TO R -3 (GENERAL RESIDENTIAL) AND MAKING A
DETERMINATION OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUAN T TO CEQA
GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(B)(3)
Staff Report presented by Tamara Campbell, Principal Planner . Ms. Campbell provided the project description and proposed zoning of a 3.06 vacant parcel from R-1 to R -3, which would allow a proposed 57 -unit low -income and very low - income housing site.
Mayor Brian Berkson opened the public hearing.
Pamela Blynn stated that the location for this project is a one -lane road that may not be the best location for a condominium project.
Further discussion followed.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Following discussion, the City Council, by consensus, tabled this item and took no further action.
Ayes: C. Barajas, B. Berkson, A. Carmona, V. Sanchez, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
17. COUNCIL BUSINESS
A. WARMINGTON RESIDENTIAL PROJECT LOCATED AT 7586 JURUPA ROAD (MA23357) ; ADOPT RESOLUTION GRA NTING FINAL
APPROVAL OF PROJECT, INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS
APPLICATION (DB) NO. 24001, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TTM) NO. 38888, AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT (SDP) NO. 23172, WITH
DENIAL OF EITHER ONE OR TWO WAIVERS OF D EVELOPMENT
REQUIREMENTS; OVERRULE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DENIAL OF
MA23357; AND APPROVE ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION; (APPLICANT: WARMINGTON RESIDENTIAL)
-13-
Staff Report presen ted by Joe Perez, Assistant City Manager, Community Development Director.
The following speakers voiced opposition to the project:
Alicia Lossing
Kevin (no last name provided)
Judy Frasch
Karina (no last name provided)
Derek Carrington
Robert Ramirez
Leticia Ruiz
Peter Daspit
Daniel Silvas
Mayor Brian Berkson commented that the developer is asking for an exemption to do any of the offsite improvements. He asked Paul Toor, Public Works Director to provide the estimated costs should the City be required to make those improvements.
Paul Toor, Public Works Director, provided an estimate of the costs to do the offsite improvements for this project. Mr. Toor explained that the main intersection of Camino Real and Jurupa Road includes a railroad crossing which will need to be relocated. Between the proposed development and the school there is a storm drain spillway which will need to be widened. The cost to open the spillway and add a new lane will cost approximately $900 ,000 for the spillway portion. The intersection will cost more than $1.6 million to improve the interchange.
Mayor Berkson shared photographs of traffic along Camino Real that outlines his concern for safety and traffic.
Joe Oftelie (applicant) apologized for his attorney’s behavior at the last Council meeting. He indicated that as part of the project, they are widening Jurupa Road the full width, all the way to the spillway. The only part of the project that is not being improved is the spillway that is in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan. In addition, the project will also include new landscaping and sidewalk improvements.
He added that they support the option to deny the waivers for the additional landscape as they are willing to provide all the additional landscap ing for the project.
Further discussion followed.
A motion was made by Mayor Brian Berkson, seconded by Council Member Armando Carmona, to uphold the Planning Commission’s decision to deny the project in its entirety and to direct the City Attorney to bring back a
-14-
resolution denying the project citing th e safety aspects and the two -story waiver.
A roll-call vote was taken.
Roll-Call:
Ayes: C. Barajas, B. Berkson, A. Carmona, V. Sanchez, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
18. COUNCIL MEMBER REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Mayor Pro Tem Chris Barajas asked that a formal resolution be brought back that would formally denounce cock fighting in the City. He requested that a discussion item be brought back that would require additional information from applicants for Boards and Commission appointments, such as whether the applicants have open code enforcement cases or a criminal background.
Council Member Armando Carmona requested that a discussion item be brought back that would allow parcels within the equestrian lifestyle overlay to be exempt from some of the state housing laws.
Council Member Veronica Sanchez requested that a discussion item be brought back that would address the proliferation of shopping carts in the community.
19. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT
City Attorney Peter Thorson had no report.
20. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS AND COMMENTS
Council Member Guillermo Silva voiced appreciation to Council Member Veronica Sanchez and promised to work with her for the betterment of the community.
Council Member Armando Carmona stated that Veronica Sanchez is a breath of fresh air and he is excited to work with her. He thanked Mayor Berskon for his leadership and he looks forward to a very productive year.
21. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the City Council, Mayor Brian Berkson adjourned the meeting at 9:51 p.m. to March 6, 2025 at 7:00 pm.
-15-
Respectfully submitted,
____________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk
Page | 1
03/28/2024.04/17/202120
S
TAFF REPORT
DATE: M ARCH 6, 2025
TO: HO
NORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
F
ROM: ROD BUTLER, CITY MANAGER
BY: SUSAN PARAGAS, FINANCE DIRECTOR
S
UBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.B
CHE
CK REGISTERS
RE
COMMENDATION
T
hat the City Council ratify the check registers dated January 30, and February 10, 18, 21, 2025 as well as the payroll registers dated January 31, and February 14, 2025.
The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley authorizes expenditures through the annual budget process. The FY 2024-25 Budget was adopted on June 6, 2024. Expenditures not included in the annual budget process are approved by resolution throughout the fiscal year.
AN
ALYSIS
A
ll expenditures on the attached check registers have been approved by the City Council and are in conformance with the authority provided by Section 37208 of the Government Code.
O
THER INFORMATION
N
one.
F
INANCIAL IMPACT
C
heck registers:
01/30/
2025 $ 1,156,016.40
02/10/2025 $ 395,914.31
02/18/2025 $ 1,420,998.64
02/21/2025 $ 3,189,979.59
RETURN TO AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.C
ORDINANCE NO. 2025-05
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE
LEGISLATIVE BODY OF CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY COMMUNITY
FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. PS 2024-008 (PUBLIC SAFETY,
COUNTRYSIDE ESTATES) AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL
TAX THEREIN
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley (the "City Council"), has previously adopted Resolution No. 2025-11 entitled "Resolution of Intention of the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley, California to Establish City of Jurupa Valley Community Fac ilities District No. P S 2024-008 (Public Safety, Countryside Estates ) and to authorize the levy of a Special Tax within City of Jurupa Valley Community Facilities District No. PS 2024-008 (Public Safety, Countryside Estates )" (the "Resolution of Intention" ), stating its intention to conduct proceedings to form City of Jurupa Valley Community Facilities District No. PS 2024-008 (Public Safety, Countryside Estates) (the "CFD") pursuant to the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, commencing with Section 53311 of the California Government Code (the "Act") to finance certain services (the "Services") including incidental expenses, to serve the CFD; and
WHEREAS, the Resolution of Intention set February 20, 2025, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as practical, as the date of a public hearing on all matters pertaining to the formation of the CFD, the extent of the CFD, the furnishing of Services to serve the CFD, and the proposed rate and method of apportionment of the special tax within the CFD (the "Rate and Method"); and WHEREAS, a notice of public hearing was published and mailed to all landowners proposed to be included in the CFD in accordance with the Act; and WHEREAS, at the public hearing, evidence was presented to the City Council on such matters before it, including a special report (the “Report”) describing the services necessary to adequately meet the needs of the CFD and the estimated costs of financing such Services as required by Section 53321.5 of the Act; and
WHEREAS, at the public hearing, all persons desiring to be heard on all matters pertaining to the formation of the CFD, the extent of the CFD, the furnishing of Services to serve the CFD, and the Rate and Method were heard and a full and fair hearing was held; and WHEREAS, subsequent to the public hearing, the City Council adopted a resolution entitled “Resolution of Formation of the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley, California, to Establish City of Jurupa Valley Community Facilities District No. PS 2024-008 (Public Safety, Countryside Estates), to Establish an Appropriations Limit therefor, to Authorize the Submittal of the Levy of Special Taxes, and to Submit the Establishment of an Appropriations Limit, to the Qualified Electors of such Community Facilities District” (the “Resolution of Formation”) which established the CFD and authorized the levy of a special tax within the CFD; and
RETURN TO AGENDA
-2-
WHEREAS, subsequent to the public hearing, the City Council also adopted a resolution entitled "Resolution of the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley Calling a Special Election and Submitting to the Qualified Electors of City of Jurupa Valley Community Facili ties District No. PS 2024-008 (Public Safety, Countryside Estates) Propositions Regarding the Establishment of an Appropriations Limit and the Annual Levy of a Special Tax Within the Community Facilities District" (the "Resolution Calling Election") which called a special election of the qualified electors within the CFD; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the Resolution Calling Election, an election was held in which qualified electors of the CFD approved the establishment of an appropriations limit fo r the CFD and the levy of a special tax (the "Special Tax") within the CFD; and
WHEREAS, on February 20, 2025, the City Council adopted a resolution entitled "Resolution of the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley Declaring the Results of a Special Election in the City of Jurupa Valley Community Facilities District No. PS 2024-008 (Public Safety, Countryside Estates) and Directing the Recording of a Notice of Special Tax Lien" (the "Resolution Declaring Results of Election") which certified the result s of the February 20, 2025 election conducted by the City Clerk, which results showed that more than two-thirds of the votes cast in the CFD were in favor of the proposition to levy the Special Tax and the proposition to establish an appropriations limit for the CFD;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY:
1. Recitals Correct. The foregoing recitals are true and correct.
2. Authorization of the Levy of a Special Tax . By the passage of this Ordinance, the City Council authorizes the levy of the Special Tax in the CFD in accordance with the Rate and Method set forth in the Exhibit “B” to the Resolution of Formation, which is on file in the office of the City Clerk and incorporated by reference herein.
3. Annual Rate Determ ination. The City Council is hereby further authorized to determine on or before August 10 each year, or such other date as is established by law or by the County Auditor-Controller of the County of Riverside, the specific Special Tax to be levied on each parcel of land in the CFD, except that special taxes to be levied shall not exceed the maximum rates set forth in the Rate and Method, but the special tax may be levied at a lower rate.
4. Exempt Property. Except as provided in Section 53340.1 of the Act and except for properties that a local agency is a landowner of within the meaning of subdivision (f) of Section 53317 of the Act, pursuant to Section 53340 of the Act, properties of entities of the state, federal and local governments shall be exempt from the levy of the Special Tax. Reference is hereby made to the Rate and Method for a description of other properties or entities that are expressly exempted from the levy of the Special Tax.
5. Use of Collections. All of the collections of the Special Tax s hall be used only as provided by the Act and in the Resolution of Formation. The Special Tax shall be levied only so long as needed for the purposes as described in the Resolution of Formation. -3-
6. Collection. The Special tax shall be collected in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem taxes and shall be subject to the same penalties and the same procedure, sale and lien in any case of delinquency as applicable for ad valorem property taxes; provided, however, that the Special Tax may be collected by direct billing by the City of the property owners in the CFD or in such other manner as may be provided by the City Council. In addition, the provisions of Section 53356.1 of the Act shall apply to any delinquent Special Tax payments.
7. Authorization. The specific authorization for adoption of the Ordinance is Section 53340 of the Act.
8. Severability. If for any reason any portion of the Ordinance is found to be invalid, or if the Special Tax is found inapplicable for any particular parcel within the CFD, b y a court of competent jurisdiction, the balance of this Ordinance, and the application of the Special Tax to the remaining parcels within the CFD shall not be affected.
9. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify the passage of this Ordinance and cause it to be published or posted in accordance with law.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on this 6th day of March, 2025.
Brian Berkson
Mayor
ATTEST:
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk
-4-
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY )
I, Victoria Wasko, City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 2025 -05 was regularly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 20th day of February, 2025 and thereafter at a regular meeting held on the 6 th day of March, 2025, it was duly passed and adopted by the following vote of the City Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Jurupa Valley, California, this 6th day of March, 2025.
Victoria Wasko, City Clerk
City of Jurupa Valley
Page | 1
120
STAFF REPORT
D
ATE: MARCH 6, 2025
TO
: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
F
ROM: ROD BUTLER, CITY MANAGER
S
UBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.D
CI
TY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF 2025 LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM
RE
COMMENDATION
T
hat the City Council approve the Legislative Platform for the calendar year of 2025.
BACKGROUND
The City of Jurupa Valley recognizes the need for active legislative engagement at the regional, state, and federal level to protect and enhance the interests of Jurupa Valley’s residents and businesses. City officials and staff maintain close relationships with Jurupa’s state and federal representatives, actively participate in various associations representing cities and coordinate with contracted legislative lobbyists to advocate, influence and monitor legislation.
The Legislative Platform provides a policy framework for the City to respond to legislative issues important to the City ; including correspondence from the Mayor or City Manager to the Legislature and/or Congress. The City’s primary legislative focus includes protecting local government control, improving public safety, maintaining local government revenues, obtaining funding f or infrastructure, housing, workforc e and economic development improvements.
ANALYSIS
B
y implementing and maintaining an active legislative advocacy program, the City can ensure that the City Council and staff are appraised of evolving state initiatives that may affect the City’s key priorities, programs, or operations. On December 21, 2023, the City Council appointed the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem to the Legislative Ad Hoc subcommittee. It is the intent of the subcommittee to work with staff and the City’s lobbyists on legislative and regulatory matters, provide direction on t he legislative platform, respond to requests for support/opposition to legislation, and represent the City at advocacy functions. T he Legislative Platform is intended to assist the Mayor, Councilmembers, and staff to proactively and appropriately address legislation that
RETURN TO AGENDA
1 FY 2025 LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM
Public Safety:
• Support efforts to improve local law enforcement, fire suppression and prevention, hazardous materials mitigation, rescue and emergency medical services, and disaster preparedness.
• Support legislation and seek funding to assist local law enforcement reduce drug, burglary, domestic violence, and assault crimes.
• Promote the protection of children from tobacco, alcohol and drug use and support related prevention and intervention programs.
• Support the improvement of vehicular, pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian safety with emphasis on the reducing the operation of motor vehicles while under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs.
• Support increased funding for disaster preparedness, prevention, response, and recovery for all hazards.
• Support legislation that strengthens local authority to regulate businesses that facilitate illegal human trafficking, gambling, prostitution, etc.
• Support funding for fire prevention and hazard mitigation projects.
Infrastructure, Transportation, Communications and Public Works:
• Pursue funding that specifically benefits Jurupa Valley’s transportation and public works projects.
• Support and protect local authority to maintain and manage the public right-of-way and receive compensation for its use.
• Protect dedicated transportation-related tax revenues sources and support increased funding for local transportation programs and facilities.
• Oppose efforts to restrict local authority to zone and plan for the locally prioritized infrastructure.
• Support funding for local roadway and easement maintenance with emphasis on funding for illegal dumping and abandonment of unsecured property.
• Legislation to reduce quantity and duration of Public Safety Power Shutoffs (PSPS).
• Support legislation protecting AM radio in vehicles.
2 Financial Sustainability / Revenue and Taxation:
• Support and protect local control of revenue and resources.
• Support Congressionally directed funding and legislative community project funding.
• Support funding for regionally significant transit corridors that impact local highways and streets.
• Preserve and enhance local ability to increase and use tax revenue.
• Oppose legislation that increases local dependence on the State for financial stability and policy direction.
• Oppose modifications to local revenue allocations without the participation and approval of locally elected public officials.
• Oppose unfunded mandates which unfairly burden cities without full restitution.
Housing, Community and Economic Development:
• Support legislation that strengthens local control and decision making on land use and zoning.
• Reformation of housing element law that provides clear processes and flexibility to accommodate regional cooperation. E stablish realistic housing goals and performance standards.
• Support economic development initiatives that improve California’s business climate and competitiveness.
• Support tools and incentives that address the work force development equity and job retention issue facing the Inland Empire.
• Support legislation that increases financial assistance to local governments, non- profit housing organizations and public/private partnerships to provide affordable, transitional, supported, and emergency housing to seniors and people with special needs, including people who are homeless or are at risk of experiencing homelessness.
• Support legislation that provides funding and resources to prevent homelessness and that supports people who are experiencing homelessness.
• Oppose legislation limiting local authority to provide a transparent development 3 process and adequately mitigate environmental impacts to the community.
Governance, Transparency and Labor Relations:
• Oppose any action that limits the authority of C ity C ouncil to govern with an emphasis on protecting the contract service delivery model.
• Support legislation that modernizes requirements for publication of legal notices.
• Support measures to achieve and maintain fair and proportionate representation on countywide and regional boards.
Environmental Quality:
• Support legislation that establishes funding for compliance with unfunded environmental mandates.
• Support measures that expand markets for recyclable materials and maintain local authority and flexibility to regulate solid waste and recyclables.
• Oppose legislation that imposes undue hardship on local agencies to implement environmental regulations.
• Support prioritization of environmental funding for CalEnviro Screen 4.0 designated disadvantaged communities that are above the 70th percentile.
Development of New Legislation:
• Automated Neighborhood Truck Enforcement – Continue efforts to implement a SB1199 type pilot program that allows cameras to assist with illegal truck traffic in residential neighborhoods enforcement. Modeled after the successful Maryland legislation and program currently in place.
• Additional legislation to build upon the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment Act – SB 1338
• Additional legislation to increase law enforcement effectiveness, efficiency and transparency.
• Additional Legislation to reduce quantity and duration of PSPS events. • Fire prevention and hazard mitigation funding for high fire risk communities. • Vulnerable population multifamily P.S.P.S. Legislation P
age | 1
S
TAFF REPORT
D
ATE: MARCH 6, 2025
TO
: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
F
ROM: ROD BUTLER, CITY MANAGER
BY: PAUL TOOR, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER
S
UBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.E
APPRO
VAL OF FINANCE TRACT MAP NO. 38947; VERNOLA RANCH
FOR FINANCE AND CONV EYANCE PURPOSES ONLY LOCATED
EAST OF INTERSTATE 1 5 (I -15), WEST OF PA TS RANCH ROAD,
SOUTH OF BELLEGRAVE AVENUE, AND NORTH OF LIMONITE
AVENUE
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Approving the F inance Map ( Tract Map No. 38947) for Finance and Conveyance purposes only.
2. A
uthorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign Finance Tract Map No. 38947.
3. Approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Subdivision Agreement and accept the surety bond for Monumentation.
BACKGROUND
On December 21, 2023, the City Council approved the Vernola Ranch Specific Plan under Master Application No. 22153 along with t he Tentative Tract Map (TTM38504). The specific plan granted approvals for the development of up to 1,576 residential dwelling units, recreational areas, a network of trails and parks, an internal street network, open spaces, landscaping, and street improvements. Furthermore, an overlay, designated within the Specific Plan, was approved for a potential school site situated at the northeast portion of the Specific Plan Area, constituting the "Project." On June 25, 2024, the Planning Commission approved Financ e Tract Map No. 38947.
The applicant has requested to record Finance Map (No. 38947) (Exhibit #1) prior to the Final Map for the project as described above. The approval and recordation of Finance Map No. 38947 would allow the applicant to arrange for any title transfer and secure
RETURN TO AGENDA
Page | 2
financing for the project. The finance map does not establish legal building boundaries or permit the applicant to construct any improvements set within the boundaries of the project. The applicant will still be required to submit the final map for the previously approved Tentative Tract Map (TTM38504) prior to permit issuance as defined by the City’s Municipal Code Title 7.
ANALYSIS
Pursuant to the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the City Municipal Code Title 7, Tract Maps require City Council action for approval, denial, or modifications. Staff recommend that the City Council approve Finance Tract Map No. 38947 and accept the offers of dedication, the subdivision agreements, and bonds.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Approval of this financing map does not have any financial impact to the city.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Do not approve Agreement as recommended.
2. Provide alternate direction to staff.
**********************SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE**********************
P
age | 1
S
TAFF REPORT
D
ATE: MARCH 6, 2025
TO
: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
F
ROM: ROD BUTLER, CITY MANAGER
BY: PAUL TOOR, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER
S
UBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.F
APPRO
VAL OF TRACT MAP NO. 37857; LAS PALMAS LOCATED
NORTH OF 45 TH STREET BETWEEN OPAL STREET AND PACIFIC
AVENUE, ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERS OF DEDICATION, APPROVAL
OF SUBDIVISION AGREEMENTS, AND ACCEPTANCE OF
IMPROVEMENT BONDS
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Approve Tract Map 37857 and accept the dedication as follows:
a. A
ccept the real property described as an easement for street, public utility and drainage purposes together with the right of ingress and egress for emergency vehicles within Lot “A” (Majesty Lane), Lot “B” (La Brisa Street), Lot “C” (Areca Lane), Lot “D” (El Granate Street), and Lots “E” through “L”. b. Accept the dedication for Lot “37” for basin and water quality purposes.
2. Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign Tract Map 37857.
3. Approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Subdivision Agreements; and
4. Accept the surety bonds for construction of related improvements and survey monumentation.
BACKGROUND
On December 21, 2023, the Jurupa Valley City Council approved TTM No.37857 for Las Palmas. The tentative tract map includes a residential subdivision of 3.84 combined acres
RETURN TO AGENDA
Page | 2
with 36 lots for single-family detached homes located on 45th Street between Pacific Avenue and Opal Street.
Staff has reviewed Tract Map 37857 and finds that it is in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Map. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved to form the Subdivision Agreements. These actions approve the Tract Map, Subdivision Agreements, and accepts offers of dedication and the bonds related to the subdivision.
ANALYSIS
Pursuant to the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the City Municipal Code Title 7, Tract Maps require City Council action for approval, denial, or modifications. Per the Subdivision Map Act Section 66474.1, a legislative body shall not deny approval of a Tract Map if it was previously approved a tentative tract map for the proposed subdivision and if it finds that the Tract Map is in substantial compliance with the previously approved tentative tract map. Staff recommends that the City Council approve Tract Map No. 37857 and accept the offers of dedication, the subdivision agreements, and bonds.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The City will receive development fees and payments as part of the obligations defined in the Municipal Code.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Do not approve Agreement as recommended.
2. Provide alternate direction to staff.
**********************SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE**********************
Page | 1
120
D
S
TAFF REPORT
D
ATE: MARCH 6, 2025
TO
: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
F
ROM: ROD BUTLER, CITY MANAGER
BY: JOE PEREZ, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER / COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
S
UBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.G
W
ARMINGTON RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 7586 JURUPA ROAD
(MA23357)--ADOPT RESOLUTION DENYING THE PROJECT ;
(APPLICANT: WARMINGTON RESIDENTIAL)
RE
COMMENDATION
1) That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2025-26, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY DENYING MASTER APPLICATION NO. 23357 CONSISTING OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38888, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 23172, AND DENSITY BONUS APPLICATION NO. 24001 THAT SOUGHT TO ALLOW THE SUBDIVISION OF 6.92 ACRES OF LAND INTO 72 LOTS FOR 67 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES AT 7586 JURUPA ROAD (APN: 183-030-014), AND MAKING A FINDING THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT
FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT SECTION 15270 SINCE THE PROJECT
IS BEING DENIED (WARMINGTON RESIDENTIAL PROJECT)
BACKGROUND
On January 16, 2025, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider Warmington Residential’s appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of its application for Master Application No. 23357 (“Project”) located at 7586 Jurupa Road at the southwest corner of Jurupa Road and Camino Real.
On February 20, 2025, the City Council discussed the Project and by a 5-0 vote directed the City Attorney to draft a Resolution denying the Project.
RETURN TO AGENDA
2-26-25
-1-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-26
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURU PA VALLEY DENYING MASTER APPLI CATION NO. 23357 , CONSISTING OF TENTATIVE TRACT M AP NO. 38888, SITE D EVELOPMENT
PERMIT NO. 23172, AN D DENSITY BONUS APPL ICATION NO. 24001 THAT SOUGHT TO ALLOW THE SUBDIVI SION OF 6.92 ACRES O F LAND INTO 72 LOTS FOR 67 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES AT 7586 JURUPA ROAD (APN: 183-030-014), AND MAKING A FINDING THE
PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT
TO CALIFORNIA ENVIRO NMENTAL QUALITY ACT SECTION 15270
SINCE THE PROJECT IS BEING DENIED (WARMINGTON
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. City’s Commitment to Affordable Housing.
(a) The City’s Housing Element was certified on April 22, 2022. The City was the first city in Riverside County to have its Housing Element certified. The Housing Element identified that the City has a regional housing needs allocation (“RHNA”) of 4,497 new housing units for the 2021 -2029 planning period. The RHNA income c ategory breakdown is as follows:
1,207 extremely low/very low-income units, 749 low-income units, 731 moderate-income units, and 1,810 above moderate-income units.
(b) In an effort to meet its RHNA obligation, the City has approved a number of housing development projects that required General Plan Amendments and zone changes. As of December 2024, the City has approved housing development projects and other General Plan amendments and zone changes that would allow for the potential development of 2,308 extremely low/very low income units, 1,267 low income units, 1,080 moderate income units, and 1,697 above moderate income units for a total potential capacity of 6,352 units. In the extremely low/very low- income category, this creates a potential surplus of 1,101 units. (c) Moreover, to encourage the development of more affordable housing, on August 18, 2022, the City adopted an inclusionary housing ordinance. This ordinance, Chapter
9.267 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code, requires all developments to either ded icate seven percent (7%) of its units to be affordable to persons or families of low income or to pay an in-lieu fee that the City will use to subsidize the development of units affordable to persons or families of low income.
(d) The City Council has provided substantial opportunities for the development of affordable housing and has , and will continue , to work with developers of affordable housing to achieve its affordable housing goals in accordance wit h State affordable housing goals.
2-26-25
-2-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
Section 2. Previous Project . On November 17, 2022, the City Council approved a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from LDR (Country Neighborhood) to MDR (Medium Density Residential), a Change of Zone (CZ) from A -1 (Light Agriculture) to R -4 (Planned Developme nt), Tentative Tract Map (TTM) No. 38151, and Site Development Permit (SDP) No. 22089 to subdivide 6.92 acres into 35 lots for single -family detached homes at 7586 Jurupa Road (APN 183 -030-014) (“Madone Collection”). The Madone Collection project was not constructed.
Section 3. Project. Warmington Residential (“Applicant”) has applied for Master Application No. 23357 consisting of Tentative Tract Map No. 38888 and Site Development Permit No. 23172 to allow the subdivision of 6.92 acres of land i nto 72 lots for 67 single family detached homes at 7586 J urupa Road ( APN: 183 -030-014) (the “Project”). The Project also includes Density Bonus Application No. 24001 seeking a 20% density bonus for a total of 67 units, one concession/incentive, and a waiver of 34 development standards.
Section 4. General Tentative Tract Map Requirements.
(a) The Applicant is seeking approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 38888 (TTM 38888) a Schedule “A” subdivision to create seventy -two (72) lots for sixty -seven (67) single- family detached homes.
(b) Section 7.05.020.A. of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that the Jurupa Valley City Council is designated as the “Advisory Agency” charged with the duty of making investigations and reports on the design and improvement of all proposed tentative Schedule “A” maps. Further, Section 7.05.020.A. of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that the City Council is authorized to approve, conditionally approve or disapprove all such tentative map land divisions and report the action directly to the City Council and the land divider. (c) Section 7.15.180 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code requires denial of a Tentative Tract Map if it does not meet all of the requirements of Title 7 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code, or if any of the following findings are made:
1) That the proposed land division is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.
2) That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.
3) That the site of the proposed land division is not physically suitable for the type of development.
4) That the site of the proposed land division is not physically suitable for the proposed density of the development.
5) That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
2-26-25
-3-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
6) That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are likely to cause serious public health problems. 7) That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. A land division may be approved if it is found that alternate easements for access or for use will be provided and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction. 8) Notwithstanding subsection 5) above, a tentative map may be approved if an environmental impact report was prepared with respect to the project and a finding was made, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (P ub. Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. ), that specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report.
Section 5. General Site Development Permit Requirements. (a) The Applicant is seeking approval of Site Development Permit No. 23172 to construct 67 single family detached homes on 6.92 acres. (b) Section 9.240.330.(3) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that no site development permit shall be approved unless it complies with the following standards:
1) The proposed use must conform to all the requirements of the City of Jurupa General Plan and with all applicable requirements of State law and the ordinances of the City of Jurupa Valley.
2) The overall development of the land shall be designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; to conform to the logical development of the land and to be compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property. The plan sh all consider the location and need for dedication and improvement of necessary streets and sidewalks, including the avoidance of traffic congestion; and shall take into account topographical and drainage conditions, including the need for dedication and improvements of necessary structures as a part thereof. 3) All site development plans which permit the construction of more than one structure on a single legally divided parcel shall, in addition to all other requirements, be subject to a condition which prohi bits the sale of any existing or subsequently constructed structures on the parcel until the parcel is divided and a final map recorded in accordance with Title 7 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code in such a manner that each building is located on a separate legally divided parcel.
Section 6. Density Bonus Application ; Concessions and Waivers Demanded by Applicant.
(a) The Applicant submitted an application for a “density bonus” under Chapter
9.300 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code related to Site Development Permit No. 23172 for the 2-26-25
-4-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
construction of 67 single family residences. By agreeing to make three (3) units available to very low income households at an affordable cost (which equates to five percent (5%) of the base density), the Applicant is entitled to a 20 percent density bonus above the otherwise allowed residential density.
(b) The Applicant also demands one incentive/concession under Government Code Section 65915(d). Specifically, the applicant deman ds to not comply with offsite improvements to widen Camino Real at Jurupa Road to two lanes and over and including the Flood Control AC Dike and spillway.
(c) The Applicant also seeks to deviate from 34 of the City’s development standards through the “waiver” provision under Government Code Section 65915(e). The specific development standards from which the Applicant seeks to deviate are set forth below. Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Section 9.30.050(D) provides that the City shall approve a waiver or reduction of a development standard, unless it makes one (1) or more of the following findings:
1) The application of the development standard does not have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a housing development at the density allowed by the density bonus and with the incentives or concessions granted to the applicant; 2) The waiver or reduction of the development standard would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(2) upon health, safety, or the physi cal environment, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact;
3) The waiver or reduction of the development standard would have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources; or
4) The waiver or reduction of the development standard would be contrary to state or federal law.
5) The Applicant seeks to deviate from the following development standards:
Code Requirement Standard Request/Deviation Waiver
Number
JVMC
§9.100.040(A)
The minimum overall
area for each dwelling
unit, exclusive of the
area used for commercial
purposes and area set
aside for street rights-of-
way, but including
recreation and service
Lots range from 2,498
square feet to 5,044
square feet. The average
lot size is 3,036 square
feet.
1 2-26-25
-5-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
areas shall be 6,000
square feet.
JVMC
§9.100.040(B)
The minimum lot area
for the individual lots
used as a residential
building site shall be
3,500 square feet.
Only six of the 67 lots
are larger than 3,500
square feet. The other 61
lots range in size from
2,498 square feet to
3,436 square feet.
2 JVMC
§9.100.040(B)
The minimum width of
each lot shall be 40 feet
and the minimum depth
shall be eighty (80) feet.
Only two of the 67 lots
are wider than 40 feet,
the remaining 65 lots
range in size from
approximately 30 feet to
38.5 feet wide.
3 JVMC
§9.100.040(B)
The minimum width of
each lot shall be 40 feet
and the minimum depth
shall be 80 feet.
Although two of the 67
lots are wider than 40
feet, the remaining lots
range from
approximately 30 feet to
38.5 feet wide
4 JVMC
§9.100.040(D)(1)
The front yard shall be
not less than 20 feet,
measured from the
existing right-of-way as
shown on any Specific
Plan of Highways,
whichever is nearer the
proposed structure.
With the exception of
one lot, front yard
setbacks range from 15
feet to 18 feet, 8 inches
5 JVMC
§9.100.040(D)(2)
Side yards on interior
and through lots shall be
not less than a width of
five feet. Side yard on
corner and reversed
corner lots shall be not
less than 10 feet from the
existing right-of-way or
from any future right-of-
way as shown on any
Specific Plan of
Highways, whichever is
One lot proposes side
yards that meet the
requirement.
Seven (7) lots propose
one side yard that meet
the requirement.
6, 7
2-26-25
-6-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
nearer the proposed
structure
JVMC
§9.100.040(D)(3)
The rear yard shall not
be less than 10 feet.
Three of the 67 lots have
a rear yard that is less
than 10 feet. These three
lots have rear yards that
are 8.4, 9.4, and 9.8 feet
in size.
8 JVMC
§9.100.040(D)(4)
No structural
encroachments shall be
permitted in the front,
side or rear yard except
as provided for in
Section 9.240.180.
66 homes encroach into
the required front yard
setback.
66 homes encroach into
the required side yard
setback.
3 homes encroach into
the required rear yard
setback.
9 JVMC
§9.240.550(E)(2)
The minimum lot area is
as required under the
applicable zone
classification for the
subject property(s).
The minimum lot size
requirement in the R-4 is
3,500 square feet. Only
six of the 67 lots are
larger than 3,500 square
feet. The remaining lots
range in size from 2,498
square feet to 3,436
square feet.
10 JVMC
§9.240.550(E)(3)
Building height. Single-
family residence shall
not exceed 35 feet in
height and more than
two stories pursuant to
the following:
(a) The number of lots
within the subdivision
with two story dwellings
shall not exceed 25%;
(b) No two story
dwelling may be located
on a lot adjacent to
another two story
dwelling; and
The proposed homes do
not exceed 35 feet in
height, but all sixty-seven
(67) homes are proposed
at two (2) stories,
meaning that there are
two story homes that are
adjacent to one another,
and two story homes are
located on corner lots.
11, 12, 13
2-26-25
-7-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
(c) No two story
dwellings may be located
on a corner lot.
JVMC
§9.240.550(E)(4)
Floor area ratio. The
maximum FAR for a one
story dwelling, including
the garage, shall not
exceed 0.40. The
maximum FAR for the
ground floor of a two
story dwelling, including
the garage, shall not
exceed 0.25. The
maximum FAR for the
second floor of a two
story dwelling shall not
exceed 0.15.
All lots have a 1st story
FAR of more than .25.
All lots have a second
story FAR of more than
.15.
14, 15
JVMC
§9.240.550(E)(5)
Open space. Not less
than 50% of the lot area
shall be permeable open
space. Not less than 90%
of the required open
space area shall be
landscaped. Driveways
to garages located in the
rear half (½) of the lot
shall not be included in
the permeable open
space calculation.
Only fourteen (14) homes
have more than fifty (50)
percent permeable open
space. The permeable
open space for the
remaining 53 homes
range from 39 to 49
percent. The project only
proposes to landscape the
front yard of each lot
which is less than the
required 90 percent.
16, 17
JVMC
§9.240.550(E)(6)
Setbacks. Provide
useable open space areas
with generous street side
setbacks that enhance the
visual appearance of the
street parkway pursuant
to the following:
(a) Front yard. Minimum
twenty (20) foot front
rear setback. Front yard
setbacks are required to
vary in length, it is
encouraged that there be
an average front yard
setback of twenty-five
One lot meets this
requirement, the
remaining front yard
setbacks range from 15 to
18 feet, 8 inches.
18, 19, 20, 21,
22 2-26-25
-8-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
(25) for the entire
subdivision.
c) Side yard, interior.
Minimum six (6) foot or
not less than ten (10)
percent of the lot width,
whichever is the greater
setback.
(d) Side yard, street
facing. Minimum ten
(10) foot setback.
(e) Rear yard. Minimum
of a twenty (20) foot
setback.
(f) Garage attached.
Street facing garages
shall be a minimum ten
(10) foot setback from
the front building line of
the dwelling and shall be
side facing in the front
half of the lot. Side entry
garages minimum of
twenty-foot front yard
setback.
Only one of 67 lots is
proposed to have both
side yards that meet the
requirement.
Only 7 of the 67 lots are
propose to have one side
yard that meets the
requirement.
Six lots are proposed to
provide street facing side
yards. Three of the 6 lots
have side yards (street
facing) that are less than
10 feet.
Garages are not set back
ten (10) feet from the
front building line. All
garages are located in the
front half of the property
and are not side facing.
JVMC
§9.240.550(E)(7)
Garages. Garages
attached or detached
shall be a secondary
feature of the home.
Garages facing the street
shall be located in the
rear half (½) of the lot.
Corner lot garages shall
not face the street side
yard.
All garages are located
within the front half of
the lot and corner lot
garages face the front
yard/street.
23 JVMC
§9.240.550(E)(8)
Off-street parking and
driveways.
(a) A minimum of two
covered garage spaces
per dwelling unit.
(b) Minimum 45 feet
between driveway curb
cuts to accommodate two
Although two covered
spaces are provided per
dwelling unit, less than
45 feet is being proposed
in between driveway curb
cuts. The space between
driveways ranges from
approximately 13 feet to
approximately 22 feet.
24, 25
2-26-25
-9-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
on-street parking spaces
between driveways. One
driveway curb cut per
lot. At the discretion of
the Public Works and
Community
Development Directors,
shorter distances
between driveway cuts
on cul-de-sacs can be
approved.
JVMC
§9.240.550(E)(9)
Streets.
(a) Street layout. Interior
streets shall connect to
the internal streets of
existing, adjacent
neighborhoods, schools,
commercial centers,
civic buildings, and
parks.
(b) Street stub outs.
Street stub outs shall be
provided to connect to
future subdivisions.
(d) Rights-of-way.
Minimum fifty-six (56)
foot local street width.
Minimum sixty (60) foot
collector street width.
(e) Roadway width.
Maximum thirty-six (36)
foot local street width.
Maximum forty (40) foot
collector street width.
(f) Alley width.
Maximum twenty (20)
foot alley width.
(g) Parkway. For local
streets minimum 10 foot
parkway width. The
parkway shall include a
five foot wide sidewalk
and the area between the
sidewalk and the curb
shall be landscaped
unless obstructed by
Interior streets do not
connect to internal streets
of any adjacent
properties.
Street stub outs are not
proposed as part of this
project.
The internal streets are
36 feet wide, which is
less than the 56 foot
minimum.
Twenty-six foot wide
roadway widths are
provided, which is less
than the 36 foot
minimum.
Alleys are proposed to be
26 feet wide which is
wider than the 20 foot
maximum.
Parkways are less than
the 10 foot wide
requirement, as the
parkways are proposed at
5 feet and do not include
landscape planters.
26, 27, 28, 29,
30, 31
2-26-25
-10-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
public signage, fire
hydrants or other safety
equipment, or utility
equipment. For non-local
streets, the minimum
parkway width is 15 feet.
At the discretion of the
Public Works and
Community
Development Directors
parkway widths can be
modified.
(h)Traffic calming
features. Subdivisions
shall include traffic-
calming features such as
traffic circles, bulb-outs,
center islands, chicanes,
speed humps, bicycle
lanes/shared lane
markings (sharrows), or
other traffic calming
devices designed to
minimize conflicts
between vehicles and
pedestrians, equestrians,
and bicycles.
JVMC
§9.240.550(E)(13)
Landscaping and
walls/fences. The
composition and location
of landscaping shall
comply with the
provisions of Chapter
9.283 of this Code and
the following standards:
(a) Street trees. A
minimum of one canopy
tree per lot or 40 feet of
street frontage when
permissible. Street trees
shall be a minimum of
two inch caliper
measured six feet above
the ground. A tree
landscaped area shall be
provided and be of an
The project does not
propose street trees as the
proposed parkways do
not include a landscape
planter.
32, 33, 34
2-26-25
-11-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
appropriate size to
accommodate the mature
size and height of the
tree. Trees shall be
located between the
sidewalk and the curb.
(b) Landscaping
area. The front yard
setback area shall be
landscaped and include a
minimum of one (1) 36
inch box canopy tree.
The rear yard setback
shall be landscaped. 90%
of the required lot open
space shall be
landscaped.
(c) Natural
features. Single-family
residential subdivisions
shall protect and
preserve natural features
such as, without
limitation, unique natural
terrain, rock
outcroppings, streams
(perennial, intermittent,
ephemeral), mature trees,
and native habitat.
The project proposes
front yard trees for 65 of
the 67 lots. The proposed
trees will be 24 inch box
which do not meet the
minimum requirement of
36 box.
The project does not
propose rear yard setback
landscaping.
The Project does not
propose 90% of the
required open space to be
landscaped.
The project does not
propose to protect or
preserve natural features.
Section 7. Procedural Findings . The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby find, determine and declare that:
(a) The application for MA No. 23357 was processed including, but not limited to, a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State law and Jurupa Valley Ordinances. (b) On October 9, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley held a duly noticed public hearing on MA No. 23357 at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters. The Planning Commission voted to continue the public hearing to October 23, 2024. The October 23, 2024 public hearing was cancelled due to lack of quorum. (c) On November 13, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley held a duly noticed public hearing on MA No. 23357 at which time all persons interested in the Project h ad the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters. 2-26-25
-12-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
Following receipt of public testimony, the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and voted unanimously to deny the Project. The Planning Commission directed staff to prep are a resolution of denial for consideration at the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting.
(d) On December 11, 2024, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted Resolution No. 2024-20 denying the Project.
(e) On January 16, 2025, the City Council o f the City of Jurupa Valley held a duly noticed public hearing on MA No. 23357 at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. Following receipt of public testimony, the City Counci l closed the public hearing -and directed staff to prepare a resolution approving MA No. 23357 but denying the requested waiver of the requirement that 75% of the homes be one story and restrictions on the location of two-story homes pursuant to Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Section 9.240.550(E)(3) and denying the requested waivers of certain landscaping requirements set forth in Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Section 9.240.550(E)(3). (f) On February 6, 2025, the Council was scheduled to consider its final decision on the Project, but deferred its consideration of final action to February 20, 2025 as one member of the Council was absent.
(g) On February 20, 2025, the City Council considered heard several public comments on the Project, allowed the Applicant to speak in response to those comments and directed the City Attorney to prepare a Resolution for denial of the Project. (h) All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
Section 8. California En vironmental Quality Act Not Applicable to Actions Rejecting or Disapproving a Project. The City Council, based on its own independent judgment, does hereby find, determine and declare that the Project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Cal. Pub. Res. Code, § 21000 et seq.) and the State Guidelines (the “CEQA Guidelines”) (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15000 et seq.) pursuant to Section 15270(a) of the CEQA Guidelines because CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves.
Section 9. Adverse Public Health and Safety Findings Supporting Denial of Concessions/Incentives and Waivers Demanded by Developer for the Project . In denying Density Bonus Application DB 24001, the City Council makes the following findings concerning the adverse public health and safety impacts of the Applicant’s demands for incentive/concession and waivers of City development standards:
(a) Applicant’s Demand to Not Construct Two Southbound Traffic Lanes on Camino Real from Jurupa Road to South of the Flood Control Facility Will Adversely Impact the Public Health and Safety. Government Code section 65915(d) provides that a city shall grant one incentive or concession if an applicant for a housing development seeks and agrees to construct a housing development with at least five percent of the total units of a housing development restricted for rental or sale to very low income households, as defined in Section 50105 of the Health and Safety Code unless the Council makes a written finding, base d upon substantial 2-26-25
-13-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
evidence, the concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households. 1) Camino Real is designated as a Secondary Highway in the City’s General Plan Mobility Corridors Map. Applicant proposes to improve Camino Real with full width pavement improvements from the proposed gutter lip to the existing Flood Control AC Dike, but Applicant demands an incentive/concession to not construct the two southbound lanes at Jurupa Road and Camino Real and over the Flood Control AC Dike on Camino Real. If the Applicant’s concession is granted, only one southbound lane of travel on Camino Real would remain . The widening of Camino Real to two southbound lanes from Jurupa Road to Camino Real Elementary School is on the City’s Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 2023 -24 to 2027-28, but there is no available source of funding for this Project and a time period for the work has not been established.
a) The applicant would also be required to improve the
eighteen (18) foot westerly parkway to include a two (2) foot wide landscaping strip adjacent to the sites six (6) foot high decorative block wall, a six (6) foot wide decomposed granite multipurpose trail, a five (5) foot wide sidewalk, and a three (3) foot wide la ndscaping planter adjacent to curb.
b) Additionally, the project would include the following improvements:
(1) A Class III Bike Route shall be provided along the
project frontage to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (2) Improvements shall provide appropriate transitions
from Camino Real Elementary School’s driveways to the proposed infrastructure. Design of transition shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 2) The Applicant demands an incentive/concession, however, to not construct the two southbound lanes at Jurupa Road and Camino Real and over the Flood Control AC Dike on Camino Real.
3) Camino Real has two south bound lanes north of Jurupa Road. It narrows to one south bound lane south of Jurupa Road. Camino Real widens again south of the Flood Control AC Dike to two southbound lanes.
4) Patriot High School is located north west of Camino Real and Jurupa Road. Students and parents at Patriot High School use Camino Real to enter and exit the school grounds by vehicles. Camino Real Elementary School is located south of the Project. Parents use Camino Real to enter and exit the student drop-off locations of the school. 5) The narrowing of the southbound lanes of Camino Real from two lanes to one lane at Jurupa Road causes substantial traffic congestion at the location of the Project 2-26-25
-14-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
on school days for Camino Real Elementary School and creates a specific safety impact with the Project.
a) Adding an additional 67 residential units will only increase the traffic in an already congested area. Widening of Camino Real for two southbound lanes from Jurupa Road to over and including the Flood Control AC Dike, spillway will alleviate this congestion and safety haz ards associated with it but Applicant demands an incentive/concession to not construct the two southbound lanes at Jurupa Road and Camino Real and over the Flood Control AC Dike on Camino Real.
b) The safety of motorists is impacted by the narrowing of Camino Real to one southbound lane at the Project Site by those who may elect to illegally drive around the vehicles waiting in the queue for the Camino Real Elementary School drop-off points. c) The safety of motorists will also be impacted by the additional traffic generated by the projected vehicle trips from the 67 units proposed for the Project as these vehicl es will need to compete with the vehicle s to enter the one southbound lane on Camino Real, especially during school days.
d) The Project only contains one regular access point that fronts Camino Real that will be used daily by all residents of the Project . An emergency access point from the Project site exists on the west side of the Project off of Kirby Drive but will not allowed for normal use.
e) Residents described accidents and near accidents and adverse safety impacts occurring on Camino Real from Jurupa Road to Camino Real Elementary School resulting from the narrowing of the two lanes to one lane at Jurupa Road , including one who referenced Riverside County Sheriff’s Department Traffic Accident Report No. JV - 230310123.
6) The Applicant has agreed to dedi cate right of way to the City for two lanes and to partially construct the pavement that would eventually allow two lanes up to the flood control channel, but only at the Project Site.
7) The denial of the concession/incentive will require the Applicant to widen Camino Real for two southbound lanes at Jurupa Road and Camino Real and to reconstruct the Flood Control AC Dike, spillway in addition to the work it has already agreed to perform, so as to enable the extension of the second lane on Camino Real from Jurupa Road to Camino Real Elementary School and alleviate the adverse safety impacts describe in this section. 8) The Applicant’s requested incentive/concession to not construct the two southbound lanes at Jurupa Road and Camino Real and over the Flood Control AC Dike on Camino Real would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety as described in this Section and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact.
2-26-25
-15-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
9) As such, the City Co uncil hereby denies the Applicant’s requested incentive/concession to not construct the two southbound lanes at Jurupa Road and Camino Real and over the Flood Control AC Dike on Camino Real.
(b) Waiver of Development Standards.
1) Government Code section 65915(e)(1) provides that in no case may a city apply any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives perm itted by this section. Moreover, Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Section 9.300.050(D) provides that the City shall approve a waiver unless it makes a finding that the “application of the development standard does not have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a housing development at the density allowed by the density bonus and with the incentives or concessions granted to the applicant“ or one of the other applicable findings. 2) Denial of Waiver of One -Story Requirements JVMC Section
9.240.550(E)(3). The City Council denies the waiver of the development standards set forth in Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Section 9.240.550(E)(3) which mandates that single-family residence shall not exceed 35 feet in height and more than two stories pursuant to the following:
a) The number of lots within the subdivision with two st ory dwellings shall not exceed 25%;
b) No two story dwelling may be located on a lot adjacent to another two story dwelling; and
c) No two story dwellings may be located on a corner lot. 3) The City is only required to waive a development standard if the imposition of that development standard would physically preclude the construction of the project at the density or with the concession/incentive permitted by state law. In this instance, th e Applicant can physically construct 67 single family residences and still comply with the requirements set forth in Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Section 9.240.550(E)(3). 4) Additionally, a waiver of the standards set forth in Jurupa Valley Municipal Code S ection 9.240.550(E)(3) would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon health of persons in the Project and in the community, set forth in the and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact.
5) Granting the requested waiver of the requirements of Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Section 9.240.550(E)(3), when combined with the requested waiver of the landscaping requirements of Section 9.240.550(E)(13)(b) and (E)(5), would reduce airflow in the Project and substantially impede the flushing of air pollutants, prevent the filtering of air pollutants and exacerbate the air quality in an around the Project. 6) As such the City Council hereby denies the Applicant’s specific requests to waive the requirements in Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Section 9.240.550(E)(3). 2-26-25
-16-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
(c) Denial of Waiver of Landscaping Requirements JVMC Sections
9.240.550(E)(5) and 9.240.550(E)(13)(b).
1) The City Council denies the waiver of the development standards set forth in Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Section 9.240.550(E)(13)(b) which mandates that the lots provide one, thirty -six (36) inch box tree in the front yard, that the rear yard setback be landscaped, and that ninety (90) percent of the required open space of each lot be landscaped. 2) The City Council further denies the waiver of the development standard set forth in Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Section 9.240.550(E)(5 ) which requires that ninety (90) percent of the required open space of each lot be landscaped. 3) The City is only required to waive a development standard if the imposition of that development standard would physically preclude the construction of the project at the density or with the concession/incentive permitted by state law. 4) In this instance, the Applicant can physically construct 67 single family residences and still comply with the requirements set forth in Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Section 9.240.550(E)(13)(b) and (E)(5). Additionally, a waiver of the standards set forth in Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Section 9.240.550(E)(13)(b) and (E)(5) would have a specific, adverse, cumulative impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon health of persons in the Project and in the community, set forth in the and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. 5) Policies AQ 2.2, AQ 2.4 of the Air Quality Element of the City’s General Plan prov ide for the planting of landscaping, vegetation and trees in order to trap particulate materials and control pollution with their attendant adverse impacts upon the health of people residing in the Project and the City.
6) As such the City Council hereby de nies the Applicant’s specific requests to waive the requirements in Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Section 9.240.550(E)(13)(b) and the requirements set forth in Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Sections 9.240.550(E)(5). (d) Except for the waiver of the landscaping requirements, Applicant has taken an “accept this or else ” posture in dealing with Staff and the Council on this Project. Applicant has refused to negotiate with the City in an effort to resolve the adverse health and safety impacts characterizing the dema nded incentive/concession and waivers for Camino Real widening at Jurupa Road and the Flood Control AC Dike and the waiver of the one-story requirements as “deal killers” if they are not granted.
Section 10. Findings for Denial of Tentative Tract Map. The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby deny Tentative Tract Map No. 38888 because the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems because, as designed, the Project creates a p ublic safety risk for the neighborin g community and Project itself for the reasons set forth in Section 9 of this Resolution..
Section 11. Findings for Denial of Site Development Permit . The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby deny Site Development Permit No. 23172 2-26-25
-17-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
because the overall development of the land is not designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare and, as designed, is not compatible with the present development of the surrounding property for the reasons set forth in Section 9 of this Resolution.
Section 12. Findings for Denial of the Project Under the Housing Accountability Act.
(a) Government Code Section 65589.5(j ) provides that when a proposed housing development project complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the application was deemed complete, but the local agency proposes to disapprove the project or to impose a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, the local agency shall base its decision regarding the proposed housing development project upon written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that both of the following conditions exist: (1) the housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be developed at a lower density; and (2) there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact identified pursuant to paragraph (1), other than the disapproval of the housing development project or the approval of t he project upon the condition that it be developed at a lower density.
(b) The Project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety for the reasons set forth in Section 9 of this Resolution.
Section 13. Denial of Density Bonus Application. Density Bonus Application No. 24001 is being denied since the Project is being denied due to public health and safety reasons set forth in Section 9 of this Resolution.
Section 14. Denial of Master Application No. 23357. Based on the foregoing findings in this Resolutio n, the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley hereby denies Master Application No. 23357 comprised of Tentative Tract Map 38888, Site Development Permit 23172 and Density Bonus Application No. 24001 to allow the construction of 67 single family detached homes on 6.92 acres of land at 7586 Jurupa Road (APN: 183-030-014). 2-26-25
-18-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
Section 15. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on this 6th day of March, 2025.
______________________________
Brian Berkson
Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk
2-26-25
-19-
12774-0201\3079692v2.doc
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY )
I, Victoria Wasko, City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2025-26 was duly passed and adopted at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on the 6th day of March, 2025 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Jurupa Valley, California, this 6th day of March, 2025
________________________________
Victoria Wasko, City Clerk
City of Jurupa Valley
Page | 1
120
STAFF REPORT
DATE: MARCH 6, 2025
TO
: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
F
ROM: ROD BUTLER, CITY MANAGER
BY: SUSAN PARAGAS, FINANCE DIRECTOR
S
UBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.H
C
OMPLIANCE REPORT FOR AB 1600 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEES
RE
COMMENDATION
T
hat the City Council receive and file the annual compliance report for Development Impact Fees.
BACKGROUND
S
tate of California Assembly Bill 1600 (AB 1600) – the Mitigation Fee Act (Gov. Code, Sections 66000 et seq.) sets forth the standards against which monetary exactions on development projects are measured.
T
he purpose of development impact fees is to finance the design, construction and acquisition of facilities and equipment necessary to accommodate future development within the City.
D
evelopment impact fees that are collected are segregated and placed in special funds or accounts, which earn interest. Those funds are held for the facilities for which the fees are collected, in accordance with Government Code Section 66006.
G
overnment Code Subsection 66006 (b)(1) sets forth the annual compliance reporting requirements as:
F
or each separate account or fund established pursuant to subdivision (a), the local agency shall, within 180 days after the last day of each fiscal year, make available to the public the following information for the fiscal year:
• A
brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund; • The amount of the fee;
RETURN TO AGENDA
Fund Description
Beginning
Balance
7/01/2023
Developer
Impact Fees
Collected Interest
Project
Expenses Ending Balance
Low Density
Detached
Dwellings
per unit
Medium
Density
Detached
Dwellings
per unit
Attached
Dwellings
per unit
Mobile Home
Dwelling Units
per unit
Commercial
Lodging Units
per unit
Retail/
Service/
Office
Uses
per sq ft
Business Park
Uses
per sq ft
Industrial Uses
per sq ft
220 General Government Facilities (Public Facilities) 3,963,698$ 68,094$ 118,645$ -$ 4,150,437$ 141.00$ 141.00$ 141.00$ 141.00$ 27.00$ 0.02$ 0.02$ 0.02$ 221 Fire Protection Facilities (Fire Facilities) 3,598,570 190,015 109,344 - 3,897,929 672.00$ 672.00$ 405.00$ 955.00$ 425.00$ 0.13$ 0.38$ 0.04$ 222 Circulaton System Facilities (Transportation - Roads) 8,404,218 4,499,071 327,813 - 13,231,102 3,134.00$ 3,134.00$ 1,693.00$ 1,568.00$ 1,654.00$ 5.06$ 3.89$ 1.66$ 223 Circulaton System Facilities (Transportation - Signals) 1,998,597 - 56,776 187,240 1,868,133 3,134.00$ 3,134.00$ 1,693.00$ 1,568.00$ 1,654.00$ 5.06$ 3.89$ 1.66$ 224 Park Facilities Improvement (Regional Parks) 2,382,558 209,418 72,909 - 2,664,885 1,423.00$ 1,423.00$ 965.00$ 1,062.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 225 Park Facilities Improvement (Regional Trails) 911,420 - 26,917 7,195 931,142 1,423.00$ 1,423.00$ 965.00$ 1,062.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 226 Library Collection and Computers (Library Books) 31,211 19,132 1,036 - 51,379 130.00$ 130.00$ 88.00$ 97.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 227 Park Facilities Improvement (Community Parks) 232,985 - 6,905 - 239,890 1,423.00$ 1,423.00$ 965.00$ 1,062.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Total Major Development Impact Fees Fund per CAFR 21,523,257 4,985,730 720,345 194,435 27,034,897 229 Mira Loma Road & Bridge Benefit District (MLRBBD) 2,007,509 5,600 59,547 21,527 2,051,129 Total DIF and Road & Bridge Benefit District 23,530,766$ 4,991,330$ 779,892$ 215,962$ 29,086,026$ ZONE
TYPE A B D E
Project
Number FY 2022-23 Project Expenses Amt. Exp.
% Funded by
DIF Fund Commercial*** $5,000 $2,652 $9,117 $5,591 All fees per acre** 62300 City Hall Furniture, Equipment and Building Improvements - 220 Industrial/
Manufacturing $5,000 $2,652 $9,117 $5,591 All fees per acre** 62500 Total Public Facilities - 100% Multi-Family $417 $612 $1,857 $1,139 All fees per residential unit Residential $1,667 $884 $2,681 $1,644 All fees per residential unit Total Fire Facilities - 221
Total Transportation - Roads - 222 (***) Acreage subject to credit must be determined by Transportation for each non-residential Building Permit 62318 Pedley/Jurupa Traffic Signal 16-C.2 25,648 223
71398 CW Traffic Signal & Safety Upgrade 161,592
Total Transportation - Signals 187,240 100%
Total Regional Parks - 224
71365 Regional Trails DIF 7,195
Total Regional Trails 7,195 100% 225
Total Library Collection and Computers - 226
71400 Riverside Dr. Widening I-15 to Wineville 21,527
Total MLRRBD 21,527 100% 229
* At time of staff report, Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) was in audit status. Figures presented here are not expected to change.
Data presented through June 30, 2024 (Unaudited*) Residential Land Use Business/Commerce Land-Use Mira Loma Road & Bridge Benefit District (MLRBBD) Rates at June 30, 2022 City of Jurupa Valley City of Jurupa Valley
Development Impact Fees (DIF) Activity Development Impact Fees (DIF) Rates For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2024 At June 30, 2024 ATTACHMENT 1
Page | 1
STAFF REPORT
DATE: MARCH 6, 2025
TO
: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
F
ROM: ROD BUTLER, CITY MANAGER
BY: JOE PEREZ, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
S
UBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 12.A
P
UBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPROVAL
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR MASTER
APPLICATION NO. 25018 (MA25018) ZONING CODE
AMENDMENT NO . 25002 (ZCA25002) CONSISTING OF AN
ORDINANCE ADDING SECTIONS 9.05.103, 9.05.105, AND 9.05.108
TO THE JURUPA VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING AN
APPLICATION PROCESS, ENTITLEMENT PERIOD, AND APPEAL
PROCESS FOR STREAMLINED, MINISTERIAL HOUSING
PROJECTS AND APPEALS PROCESS FOR INCOMPLETENESS
DETERMINATIONS UNDER THE PERMIT STREAMLINING ACT,
AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER CEQA
RECOMMENDATION
1) That the City Council conduct a public hearing, receive public testimony, and introduce and conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. 2025-07, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY ADDING SECTIONS 9.05.103, 9.05.105 AND 9.05.108 TO TITLE 9 (PLANNING AND ZONING) OF THE JURUPA VALLEY MUNICIPAL
CODE ESTABLISHING AN APPLICATION PROC ESS, ENTITLEMENT
PERIOD, AND APPEALS PROCESS FOR STREAMLINED, MINISTERIAL
HOUSING PROJECTS AND AN APPEALS PROCESS FOR
INCOMPLETENESS DETERMINATIONS UNDER THE PERMIT
STREAMLINING ACT, AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER
THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
BACKGROUND
In recent years, the State of California has implemented processes requiring local jurisdictions to streamline and ministerially approve housing development projects that
RETURN TO AGENDA
Page | 2
meet specific criteria. Ministerial approval means that staff review applications based on objective standards without requiring a public hearing, discretionary findings, or review by the Planning Commission or City Council.
Urgency Ordinance
On January 16, 2025, the City Council adopted an urgency ordinance establ ishing an appeals process for streamlined ministerial housing projects and incompleteness determinations under the Permit Streamlining Act. This urgency ordinance is in effect and will remain in effect unless repealed by the City Council.
Planning Commission Recommendation
On February 12, 2025, the Planning Commission held a hearing to consider a recommendation on the proposed zoning code amendment to the City Council. Following deliberation, the Commission voted unanimously to approve Resolution No. PC-2025-02, recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed amendment in Attachment 1.
State Streamlined Approval Bills
Three bills from the past legislative session create or expand streamlined approval processes for housing development projects. Senate Bill 1123 requires local agencies to ministerially approve a parcel map or a tentative and final map for housing development projects that meet specific criteria. These criteria include: (1) the housing development project on the proposed subdivided lot w ill contain 10 or fewer residential units, and (2) the project meets one of the following conditions: it is no larger than five acres, zoned for multifamily residential development, and creates parcels no smaller than 600 square feet; or it is vacant, no l arger than one and a half acres, zoned for single- family residential development, and creates parcels no smaller than 1,200 square feet.
The Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022 requires the streamlined approval of affordable housing developments or mixed- income housing developments that meet specified objective standards, affordability requirements, and site criteria, including being located in zones where office, retail, or parking are principally permitted uses. Assembly Bill 2243 further am ends the Act to allow streamlined approval for developments on regional mall sites and extends streamlined, ministerial approval to housing developments located within 500 feet of a freeway, provided the buildings meet certain standards.
Existing law (commonly referred to as “ SB 35”) requires the streamlined approval of a multifamily housing development, if the development satisfies specified objective planning standards, including, among others, that the development is subject to a requirement mandating a minimum percentage of below market rate housing . Assembly Bill 3122 changes some of the criteria that makes a housing development project eligible for the SB 35 streamlined approval process.
Current Procedure Gaps in the City’s Process
These, and other laws mandated by the State, require streamlined ministerial approval of housing projects. Each project is evaluated to determine whether it meets the criteria for streamlined approval. If it is determined that the criteria is met, the project is appr oved.
Page | 3
If it is determined that the criteria is not met, the project is denied. At present, the City’s Municipal Code does not include a specific procedure for an applicant to submit an application for these types o f streamlined projects, nor is there an entitlement period for these type of applications. Moreover, a process does not exist to appeal this ministerial determination.
In addition to the need to create an appeal process for ministerial approval processes, the City also needs to create an appeal process for ministerial determinations regarding development application completeness. The Permit Streamlining Act requires that a local agency identify the information that must be submitted for a development project to be “complete” and ready for processing. The local agency must respond regarding completeness (or incompleteness) within 30 days of receiving the application materials.
Under state law , local agencies must provide a process for the applicant to appeal an incompleteness determination. M any agencies rely on broadly applicable appeal processes to ensure compliance with this S tate law requirement . However, an agency may establish a process that is specifically applicable to incompleteness determinations.
PROPOSED MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENTS
A proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to address streamlined ministerial housing projects has been prepared. Proposed Section 9.05.103 creates an application to process these types of projects. The project applicant will need to apply for an Administrative Use Permit that will be either approved, conditionally approved or denie d by the Community Development Director. The criteria for approval or disapproval of the project will depend on the project’s adherence to the requirements set forth in State law.
Unless otherwise set forth under State law, such as for SB 35 projects, the entitlement will be valid for two years, with the ability to extend three more years (in one- year increments), for a total of five years. This is the same entitlement period as Site Development Permits.
Proposed s ection 9.05.105 creates an appeals process for these types of housing development projects. Any person seeking to appeal t he Community Development Director’s decision may appeal the decision to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission’s decision is, in turn, appealable to the City Council.
The proposed Section 9.05.108 establishes an appeal process for incompleteness determinations under the Permit Streamlining Act. Applicants may appeal a determination of incompleteness to the City Council, which serves as the designated and final deciding body and provides a determination within the established 30- day deadline not ed in the Permit Streamlining Act.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The Ordinance has been reviewed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the State CEQA Guidelines. It is recommended that the City Council find the Ordinance does not const itute a “ project” under CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(2), as it has no potential to result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment. Additionally, the Ordinance qualifies for exemptions under CEQA Guidelines Section 15378, as it does not involve any potential for direct or indirect physical changes to the environment.
-1-
ORDINANCE NO. 2025-07
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF JURUPA VALLEY ADDING SECTIONS 9.05.103,
9.05.105 AND 9.05.108 TO TITLE 9 (PLANNING AND
ZONING) OF THE JURUPA VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE
ESTABLISHING AN APPLICATION PROCE SS,
ENTITLEMENT PERIOD , AND APPEALS PROCESS FOR
STREAMLINED, MINISTE RIAL HOUSING PROJECT S
AND AN APPEALS PROCESS FOR INCOMPLETENESS
DETERMINATIONS UNDER THE PERMIT
STREAMLINING ACT , AND MAKING A FINDING OF
EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Procedural Findings.
A. New State laws require streamlined ministerial review of housing development projects on the basis of objective standards . These project s must be approved without a public hearing, discretionary findings, or review by the Planning Commission or City Council. The City’s Municipal C ode does not includ e a process to accept and process these applications and an entitlement period for these projects. In addition, the Municipal Code does not include a process to appeal (1) an approval or den ial of a hous ing project, or (2) a determination made by the Community Development D irector or staff that an application for a development project is incomplete as required by Govenrment Code Section 65943.
B. On January 16, 2025, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2025-02, an urgency ordinance establishing an appeals process for streamlined ministerial review housing development projects, and for incompleteness determinations under the Permit Streamlining Act.
Section 2. Code Amendment. A new Section 9.03.105 is hereby added to Chapter
9.05 (Land Use Ordinance) of Title 9 (Planning and Zoning) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code to read as follows:
“Sec. 9.05.103 Application p rocess and e ntitlement period for streamlined , ministerial housing projects.
A. Applicability. This section shall apply to a ny housing development project that must be approved ministerially pursuant to State law. For purposes of this section, ministerial approval means a project that is approved by staff on the basis of objective standards and is not subject to a public hearing before the Planning Commission or City Council.
B. Applications. Any housing development project that must be approved ministerially pursuant to State law shall apply for an Administrative Use Permit.
-2-
1. Applications for consideration of a n Administrative Use Permit shall be made to the Community Development Director on the forms provided by the Planning Division, shall be accompanied by a filing fee as established by fee resolution of the City Council and shall include such information and documents as may be required by the Planning Division checklist for the particular application, in addition to the following:
(a) Name and address of the applicant and all persons that own any part of the property, including evidence that all owners agree to the application. (b) Location or address, and legal description of property. (c) A site plan, drawn to scale, that shows the following:
i. Boundary and dimensions of property.
ii. Topography of the property.
iii. Location of adjacent streets, drainage structures, utilities, buildings, signs, and other features that may affect the use of the property.
iv. Proposed development, including planned buildings and structures, access, drainage, yards, drives, parking areas, landscaping, signs and walls or fences.
v. Dimensioned elevat ions, including details of proposed materials for elevations.
2. Action on Administrative Use Permits.
(a) The Community Development Director shall approve, conditionally approve or disapprove an Adminstrative Use P ermit based upon the standards set forth in State law for approval or disapproval of the project and within the time period specified by State law and shall give notice of the decision, including any required conditions of approval, by mail, to the applicant and any other persons requesting notice.
3. Approval period.
(a) Unless otherwise specified by State law, a ny Administrative Use Permit that is approved shall remain valid and be used within two (2) years from the effective date thereof, or within such additional time as may be s pecified in the conditions of approval, which shall not exceed a total of five (5) years for the entitlement ; otherwise, the Administrative Use Permit shall be null and void. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if a n Administrative Use Permit is required to be used within less than five (5) years, the applicant or his/her successor -in-interest may, prior to its expiration, request up to three, one year extensions of time in which to use the Administrative Use Permit. A request for extension of time shall be made on forms provided by the Planning Division and shall be filed with the Community Development Director, accompanied by the fee established by resolution of the City Council. Within thirty (30) days following the filing
-3-
of a request for an extension, it shall be considered by the Community Development Director. An extension of time may be granted upon a determination that valid reason exists for the applicant or his/her successor-in-interest not using the Administrative Use Permit within the required period of time. If an extension is granted, the total time allowed for use of the Administrative Use Permit shall not exceed a period of five (5) years, calculated from the effective date of the issuance of the Administrative Use Permit. The term “use” shall mean the beginning of substantial construction of the use that is authorized, which construction must thereafter be pursued diligently to completion, or the actual occupancy of existing buildings or land under the terms of the authorized use.”
Section 3. Code Amendment. A new Section 9. 05.105 is hereby added to Chapter
9.05 (Land Use Ordinance) of Title 9 (Planning and Zoning) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code to read as follows:
“Sec. 9.05.105 Appeals process for streamlined, ministerial housing projects A. Applicability. This section shall apply to a ny housing development project that must be approved ministerially pursuant to State law . For purposes of this section, ministerial approval means a project that is approved by staff on the basis of objective standards and is not subject to a public hearing before the Planning Commission or City Council.
B. Appeals to Planning Commission . Any person seeking to appeal the decision of the Community Development Director to either app rove or deny a housing development project that is subject to ministerial review, may appeal such decision by filing an appeal with the City Clerk within 15 calendar days of the date of the written notice of the decision. The appeal shall be made on the f orms provided by the Planning Division and shall be accompanied by the applicable filing fee as set forth by resolution. Upon receipt of a completed appeal form, the City Clerk shall set the matter of the appeal for hearing before the Planning Commission not less than fifteen (15) nor more than sixty (60) days thereafter and shall give written notice of the hearing to the applicant, appellant. and the Community Development Director. The Planning Commission shall hear the appeal de novo. The Planning Commission shall render its decision within thirty (30) days following the close of the appeal hearing.
C. Appeals to City Council . An appeal of the Planning Commission decision to the City Council shall be filed and processed pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 9.05.100.
An appeal may be filed by the applicant, owner of the property subject to the application, a person who presented oral or written comments to the Planning Commission, or any other interested person. An appeal may also be filed by an individual Council Member or by the City Council, provided, however, that any such appeal shall be solely on the basis that the issues related to the application are important to the city and should be decided by the entire City Council, and , provided further, that an appeal by an individual Council Member or the Council shall not mean, nor shall it be construed to mean, that the individual Council Member or the City Council is expressing a view in favor of or in opposition to the application .” Section 4. Code Amendment. A new Section 9.05.108 is hereby added to Chapter
9.05 (Land Use Ordinance) of Title 9 (Planning and Zoning) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code to read as follows:
-4-
“Sec. 9.05.108 Appeals process for incompleteness determinat ions under the Permit Streamlining Act.
A. Applicability. This section shall apply to any development project that is subject to California Government Code Section 65920 (the Permit Streamlining Act).
B. An applicant for a development project that is subject to the Permit Streamlining Act may appeal staff’s determination that the zoning application is incomplete.
C. The appeal shall be in writing and shall state the facts and basis for the appeal, and the relief or action sought, and shall be accompanied by the required fee.
D. The appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk within 15 calendar days of the date of the written determination that the application is incomplete.
E. The appeal shall be heard by the City Council no later than sixty days after the filing of the appeal.
F. After receiving an appeal from the determination that the application is incomplete, and following a public hearing, the City Council, whose decision is final, by the affirmative vote of a majority of its voting members, shall determine whether the application is complete or incomplete. In order to determine that an application is incomplete, the City Council must make all of the following findings:
(1) The item or items identified as incomplete by the city were included in the city's submittal requirement checklist.
(2) The city provided the applicant with a notice of the incomplete item or items within thirty calendar days after the city received the applicant's application. (3) The notice specified those parts of the application that were incomplete and indicated the manner in which they could be made complete, including a list and thorough description of the specific information needed to complete the application. (4) The applicant resubmitted the application.
(5) The materials provided by the applicant with the resubmitted application did not include information identified and described in the notice of incompleteness.
G. The city shall provide the applicant a written notice of the City Council’s decision following the hearing and before the expiration of the sixty-day period for hearing the appeal.”
Section 5. Repeal of Urgency Ordinance. The City Council does hereby repeal Ordinance No. 2025-02 so that it has no further effect upon the effective date of this Ordinance.
Section 6. CEQA. The City Council finds that the Ordinance does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(2) because there is no potential that that it will result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 because it has no potential for either a direct physical change to the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. The City Council further finds that even if the Ordinance is a project under CEQA that it falls within the “common sense” CEQA exemption set forth in CE QA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), excluding projects where “it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” Adoption of the
-5-
Ordinance does not allow for the approval or disapproval of any development in the City. Instead, it merely creates a process to accept and process applications, an entitlement period and an appeals process by which streamlined housing development projects and incompleteness determinations for development projects may be appealed.
Section 7. Severability. If any section or provision of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, or contravened by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining sections and/or provisions of this O rdinance shall remain valid. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section or provision thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more secti on(s) or provision(s) may be declared invalid or unconstitutional or contravened via legislation.
Section 8. Certification. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published and posted in the manner required by law.
Section 9. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall on the date provided in Government Code Section 36937.
PASSED, APPROVED , AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the Ci ty of Jurupa Valley on this 20th day of March, 2025.
______________________________
Brian Berkson
Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk
-6-
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY )
I, Victoria Wasko, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 2025-07 was introduced at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on the 6th day of March, 2025, and thereafter at a regular meeting held on the 20th day of March, 2025 it was duly passed and adopted by the following vote of the City Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Jurupa Valley, California, this 20th day of March, 2025.
________________________________
Victoria Wasko, City Clerk
City of Jurupa Valley
Page | 1
120
S
TAFF REPORT
DATE: MARCH 6, 2025
TO
: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
F
ROM: ROD BUTLER, CITY MANAGER
BY: JOE PEREZ, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
S
UBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 13.A
A
GREEMENT WITH UNLIMITED ENVIRONMENTAL INC., FOR THE
ABATEMENT AND DEMOLITION OF THE DILAPIDATED BUILDING
AT 6631 CLAY STREET
RE
COMMENDATION
I
t is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to:
1. Execute the Agreement with Unlimited Environmental, Inc. for the demolition of the dilapidated building located at 6631 Clay Street, which poses a hazard to public safety and is in violation of local building codes; and
2. Allocate funding for the demolition and any associated costs, ensuring that the amount does not exceed $89,000 dollars for the safe removal of the structure.
BACKGROUND
O
ver the years, the re have been multiple incidents and ongoing public safety concerns regarding the former Sizzler building located at 6631 Clay Street . Several fires have occurred at the building , raising concerns about its structural integrity and safety. Each fire not only poses a significant risk to the surrounding community but also strains emergency response resources. The 8,000 square foot building has been abandoned since 2020. A vehicle crashed into the side of the building in November 2021, leading to it being red tagged and deemed unsafe due to compromised structural integrity.
Additionally, there have been two structure fires at the site, occurring in December 2021 and March 2024. Code Enforcement has issued administrative citations to the property owner, but efforts to have the property owner address the same problems have been unsuccessful. As a result, the City initiated legal proceedings, declaring the property a public nuisance. In May 2024, the City successfully obtained a judgement from a public
RETURN TO AGENDA
Page | 2
nuisance hearing with a third party hearing officer, confirming that the building is a public nuisance.
In addition to the fire hazards, the building has frequently been occupied by homeless individuals seeking shelter. These break-ins have compounded the problems associated with the structure, increasing the likelihood of further vandalism and potentially dangerous situations for both occupants and first responders.
Residents have expressed concerns about safety, sanitation, and the overall impact on community well -being. The building's dilapidated condition has drawn attention from various City departments, highlighting the need for intervention to address the issue effectively. Addressing this nuisance building is critical not only for ensuring public safety but also for improving the quality of life in the surrounding area.
ANALYSIS
To address the safety concerns, we solicited proposals for the demolition of the nuisance property. We received 11 proposals as follows:
Contract or Bidder Demo Asbestos Total
1 Eagle Eye Demolition, Inc $39,000.00 $0.00
2 CO BROTHERS LLC $39,800.00 $0.00
3 ASR Demolition INC. $58,000.00 $90,000.00 $148,000.00 4 Unlimited Environmental, Inc. $74,000.00 $15,000.00 $89,000.00 5 Metrocell Construction, Inc. $65,200.00 $0.00
6 Demo Unlimited Inc. $69,663.00 $0.00
7 Interior Demolition, Inc. $102,000.00 $0.00
8 ISSA ELECTRIC, INC. $124,000.00 $0.00
9 Alpha Petroleum Transport Inc II $124,429.41 $0.00
10 Earth General Construction $0.00 $0.00 $390,000.00
11 Cinbad Industyr, Inc. $200,000.00 $269,000.00 $469,000.00
It is recommended that Unlimited Environmental, Inc. be selected since they had the most competitive bid including asbestos removal. Additionally, Unlimited Environmental, Inc. is a reputable company with an accomplished perform ance history. The building has been found to contain asbestos, which will need to be properly addressed. This asbestos removal cost is included in the not -to-exceed budget of $89,000 dollars. The City is moving forward with this demolition of the building due to life and safety concerns as well as the high visibility and nuisance conditions it presents. It serves as a gateway into the City and is one of the first buildings seen when entering from Riverside. Additionally, this approach is more cost efficient for the City, as it helps avoid potentially high legal fees and lengthy court proceedings. By proceeding with the demolition, we can ensure a shorter timeline and more effective resolution of the nuisance issues.
Page | 3
The City will need to file for an abatement warrant from Riverside County Municipal Court to proceed with the demolition of the building. It is anticipated the warrant would be obtained within 30- 60 days. The costs associated with the demolition, including City Attorney and staff time, will be placed as a lien on the property.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The agreement calls for a not -to-exceed amount of $89,000 for the project. The funds required for the proposed abatement were not included in the adopted FY 2024- 25 Community Development budget, which will affect the G eneral Fund. A budget appropriation of $89,000 is required for account number 100.1240.54110, Code Compliance Professional Services. However, after the project is completed, the City will recover the cost of the abatement process through placement of a lien on the property.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve Agreement with Unlimited Environmental, Inc. and approve budget appropriation for demolition of the building located on 6631 Clay Street;
2. Do not approve the agreement between Unlimited Environmental, Inc. and the budget appropriation; or
3. Provide alternative direction to staff.
************************** SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE **************************
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY AGREEMENT
FOR DEMOLITION SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of March 6, 2025, by and between the City of Jurupa Valley (“City”), and Unlimited Environmental, Inc., a California corporation (“Contractor”). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:
1. SCOPE OF WORK. Contractor shall perform all of the work described in the Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. (“Work”) and shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and transportation services required for the Work. All of said Work to be performed and materials to be furnished for the Work shall be in strict accordance with the specifications set forth in the Scope of Work. The Work shall be completed within the time set forth in the Scope of Work. Contractor shall not commence the Work until such time as directed in writing by the City.
2. C
OST OF WORK . For the Work described in Section 1. of this Agreement Contractor shall receive the sum of Eighty-Nine Thousand Dollars ($89,000.00) payable in accordance with the Schedule of Payments, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit B.
Any terms other than a description of the work to be performed, costs of the work, or the payment schedule contained in Exhibits A or B is null and void and not a part of this Agreement.
3. P
ERFORMANCE . Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, performs all tasks described herein.
Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement.
4. CI
TY APPROVAL . All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed subject to the approval of City or its authorized representatives, and the quality of the workmanship shall be guaranteed for one year from date of acceptance.
5. AM
ENDMENTS . If the City Manager has entered into this Agreement on behalf of the City, the City Manager may approve an amendment to this Agreement and additional payment up to the amount of his contract authority. If this Agreement was originally approved by the City Council, then any amendments approved by the City Council, except that the City Manager may approve amendments extending the time for performance, modifying the scope of work without any change to the maximum payment or approving a change in name of the contractor.
6. W
AIVER OF CLAIMS . On or before making final request for payment under Paragraph 2., above, Contractor shall submit to City, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this contract; the acceptance by Contractor of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against City under or arising out of this Contract except those
-2-
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
previously made in writing and request for payment. Contractor shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment.
7. PREVAILING WAGES.
A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations and on its website at http://www.dir.ca.gov/DLSR/DPreWageDetermination.htm. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk’s office of Jurupa Valley.
Contractor shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Contractor shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of $50.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract.
B. Registration with the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) is mandatory as a condition for bidding, providing certain services, and working on a public works project as specified in Labor Code Section 1771.1(a). Contractor and any subcontractors must be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations to be qualified to bid, or provide a proposal and/or time and material quote or be listed in a bid, proposal or quote, subject to the requirements of Public Contract Code Section 4104; or engage in the performance of any contract that is subject to Labor Code Section 1720 et seq., unless currently registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Labor Code Section 1725.5. Contractor and subcontractors will be required to provide proof of registration with the DIR. For more information regarding registration with the Department of Industrial Relations, refer to http://www.dir.ca.gov/Public-Works/PublicWorks.html
.
8. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT
CAUSE.
A. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement.
B. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Contractor the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3.
-3-
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
9. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR.
A. The Contractor’s failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor’s control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default.
B. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement.
10. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Contractor’s negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City.
11. L
IABILITY INSURANCE . Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, or employees.
A. M
inimum Scope of Insurance . Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001).
2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto).
3) Worker’s Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer’s Liability Insurance.
B. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than:
1) General Liability: two million dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If
-4-
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 2) Automobile Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
3) Employer’s Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease.
C. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions shall not exceed $25,000 unless otherwise approved in writing by the City Manager in his sole discretion.
D. O
ther Insurance Provisions . The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1) The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
2) For any claims related to this project, the Contractor’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor’s insurance and shall not contribute with it.
3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
4) The Contractor’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer’s liability.
5) Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days’ prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City.
-5-
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
E. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A-:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City.
F. V erification of Coverage . Contractor shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City’s forms, the Contractor’s insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by these specifications.
G. C
ontractor, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies :
“I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workman’s Compensation or undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract.”
12. PERFORMANCE AND LABOR AND MATERIAL BONDS. Within ten (10) business days from the City Council’s approve of this agreement, Contractor shall provide the City with: (1) a Performance Bond to assure faithful performance of this Agreement in regard to the work required to be constructed pursuant to this Agreement in the amount of the Contract; and (2) a Labor and Materials Bond to secure payment to any contractor, subcontractor, persons renting equipment, or furnishing labor or materials for the work required to be constructed or installed pursuant to this Agreement in the additional amount of the Contract. The bonds shall be in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibits C and D, incorporated herein by this reference, and approved by the City Attorney. The surety shall be a surety admitted in the State of California and approved by the City.
13. TI
ME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this Agreement .
14. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.
A. Contractor is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor’s exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor’s officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City.
Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner.
B. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for
-6-
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder.
15. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section.
16. CO
NTRACTOR’S INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. No plea of
ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary independent examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by City for purposes of letting this Contract out to proposal will be accepted as an excuse for any failure or omission on the part of the Contractor to fulfill in every detail all requirements of this Contract. Nor will such reasons be accepted as a basis for any claims whatsoever for extra compensation or for an extension of time.
17. CO
NTRACTOR’S AFFIDAVIT . After the completion of the Work contemplated by this Contract, Contractor shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors on the Work have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California.
18. B
OOKS AND RECORDS . Contractor’s books, records, and plans or such part thereof as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the City.
19. U
TILITY LOCATION . City acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215.
20. RE GIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS . Contractor agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4215.
21. I NSPECTION. The Work shall be subject to inspection and testing by City and its authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and places, including without limitation, the plans of Contractor and any of its suppliers. Contractor shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and convenience of inspectors.
All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as to not unduly delay the Work.
The Work shall be subject to final inspection and acceptance notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final inspection shall be made within a reasonable time after completion of the Work.
-7-
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
22. DISCRIMINATION. Contractor represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin, color, sex, age, or handicap.
23. W
RITTEN NOTICE . Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice:
To City: City of Jurupa Valley
8930 Limonite Ave.
Jurupa Valley, California
Attention: City Manager
To Contractor: Unlimited Environmental, Inc.
9945 Pioneer Blvd.
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Attention:
24. ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City.
25. LI
CENSES . At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement.
26. G OVERNING LAW . The City and Contractor understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal court with jurisdiction over the City of Jurupa Valley.
27. P
ROHIBITED INTERESTS . No officer or employee of the City of Jurupa Valley who participates in the development or approval of this Agreement or who administers it shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, the proceeds thereof, the Contractor, or Contractor’s sub-contractors for this project, during his or her tenure or for one year thereafter. The Contractor hereby warrants and represents to the City that no officer or employee of the City of Jurupa Valley has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the Contractor or Contractor=s subcontractors on this project. Contractor further agrees to notify the City in the event any such interest is discovered whether or not such interest is prohibited by law or this Agreement.
28. EN
TIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All
-8-
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party’s own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material.
29. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written.
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY
Rod B. Butler
City Manager
Attest:
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk
Approved As to Form:
Peter M. Thorson
City Attorney
-9-
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
UNLIMITED ENVIRONMENTAL, INC., a
California corporation
By:
Name:
Title:
By:
Name:
Title:
[Two signatures of corporate officers or corporate authority resolution required for Contractor.]
-10-
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF WORK
EXHIBIT B
PRICING - TOT AL PRICE OF DEMOLITION SERVICES
TOT AL PRICE OF DEMOLLITION SERVICES
Demolition of Structures Located at: 6631 Clay Street, Jurupa Valley, CA 92509.
A. TOTALPROPOSALPRICE-DEMOLITION
dollars; ( total DEMO price amount in
words )
B. TOT AL PROPOSAL PRICE -ASBESTOS REMOVAL
dollars; ( total ASBESTOS price
amount in words )
C. TOTAL PROPOSAL PRICE - DEMOLITION + ASBESTOS REMOVAL dollars; ( total DEMO + ABESTOS price
amount in words )
PROPOSED PROJECT DURATION:
Submitted By:
S
Start Date:
.00
. Completion Date:
. Company Name
. Address
City , State
Siznature/Title Printed
Zip
Date:
-9-
Unlimited Environmental, Inc.
9945 Pioneer Blvd
Santa Fe Springs
CA
90670
Jill Hunt-Dupleich, Vice President
Sixty Four Thousand
TBD
10 Working Days
Unlimited Environmental, Inc.
64,000
N/A
Ten Thousand
9/5/24
REQUEST FOR CHANGE
Date UEI Project Number: 224-0171-CO2
To Email:[email protected]
Company
From Email:
Company
Subject: Request for Change to Contract 2
Change Order Cost Breakdown
Description Days Units Rate
UEI Costs
Asbestos Roof Abatement 1 1 $12,000.00
0.00%
5%
Total for this Change Order
Previous Change Orders
Original Contract
Revised Contract
Construction Schedule Days10
Change to Contract Schedule - Additional Days3
All terms and conditions of the original contract still apply.
Approved/Accepted
Signature Name/Title Date
Unlimited Environmental Inc.
9945 Pioneer Blvd, Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Office: 562.981.6600 Fax: 562.981.2218
License # 668511
Subcontractor Subtotal $0.00
Daniel Bernal [email protected]
11/19/2024
Rebecca Abeyta
City of Jurupa Valley
Amount
-$
Description of Change : Abate and dispose 2000SF roof and parapet roof membrane throughout and 10SF of grey/black Subcontractor Mark-Up $0.00
Change Order Subtotal $12,000.00
Overhead and Profit $0.00
$3,000.00
$15,000.00
$12,000.00
$3,000.00
Project Name:Jurupa Valley Partially Fire Damaged Former SIZZLER Restaurant Unlimited Environmental
RFC No.
$12,000.00
penetration roof mastic as described on "ADAPTIVE Building Group, Asbestos/LEAD Survey, Dated 11/12/2024, ABG Project # 240129".
-12-
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
EXHIBIT C
PERFORMANCE BOND
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
BOND NO._________
PERFORMANCE BOND
FOR
______________________________________________
PROJECT NO. PW__-___
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS:
THAT, WHEREAS, the City of Jurupa Valley, State of California, entered into a contract dated , 2025, hereinafter called “Contract,” with:
[ NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR]
hereinafter called “Principal,” for the work described as follows:
___________________________ (PROJECT NO. PW- ___); and
WHEREAS, the said Principal is required under the terms of said Contract to furnish a bond for the faithful performance of said Contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, We, the Principal, and
NAME OF SURETY
duly authorized to transact business under the laws of the State of California, as Surety, hereinafter called “Surety,” are held and firmly bound unto the City of Jurupa Valley in the penal sum of
DOLLARS and CENTS ($ ), lawful money of the
United States, for the payment of which sum we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.
-13-
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that, if the Principal, its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns, shall in all things stand to, abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions and agreements in the said Contract, and in any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on its part to be kept and performed, at the time and in the manner therein specified, in all respects according to their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Jurupa Valley, its officers and agents, as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and virtue.
As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified, costs and reasonable expenses and fees shall be included, including reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred by the City of Jurupa Valley in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered.
The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work, or to the Specifications.
-14-
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on , 2025.
(Seal)
PRINCIPAL
By:
Name:
Title:
By:
Name:
Title:
SURETY
By:
Name:
Title:
By:
Name:
Title:
Attach Notarial Acknowledgement or Jurat for both the Surety and Principal Signatures APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
-15-
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
EXHIBIT D
LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
BOND NO. _______
LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND
FOR
______________________________________________
PROJECT NO. PW__-___
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS:
THAT, WHEREAS, the City of Jurupa Valley has awarded to
CONTRACTOR’S NAME AND ADDRESS
Hereinafter called “Contractor,” a contract for the work described as follows:
____________________________________ NO. PW__-___, hereinafter called “Contract,” and
WHEREAS, said Contractor is required by the provisions of Sections 9550 of the Civil Code to furnish a bond in connection with said Contract, as hereinafter set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, WE, the undersigned Contractor, as Principal, and
NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY
duly authorized to transact business under the laws of the State of California, as Surety, hereinafter called “Surety,” are held and firmly bound unto the City of Jurupa Valley, California, and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, materialmen, and other persons employed in the performance of the aforesaid Contract and referred to in Division 4, Part 6, Title 3 of the Civil Code, in the penal sum of
DOLLARS
and CENTS ($ ) , lawful money of the United States, said sum being not less than one hundred (100%) of the estimated amount payable by the said City of Jurupa Valley under the terms of the Contract, for the payment of which we bind ourselves, our
-16-
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.
THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that, if said Contractor, or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, or subcontractors, shall fail to pay for any materials, provisions, provender or other supplies, or teams, implements or machinery, used in, upon, for, or about the performance of the work under the Contract to be done, or for any work or labor thereon of any kind or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to such work or labor, as required by the provisions of Title 3 of Part 6 of Division 4 of the Civil Code, Public Work of Improvement, and its successor, and provided that the claimant shall have compiled with the provisions of said Civil Code, the Surety shall pay for the same in an amount not exceeding the sum specified in this bond, otherwise the above obligation shall be void.
As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified, costs and reasonable expenses and fees shall be included, including reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred by the City of Jurupa Valley in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered.
This bond shall inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies, and corporations entitled to file claims under Section 9100 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond, and shall also cover payment for any amounts required to be deducted, withheld, and paid over to the Employment Development Department from the wages of employees of the Contractor or its subcontractors pursuant to Section 13020 of the Unemployment Insurance Code.
The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond. The Surety hereby waives notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same.
-17-
12774-0009\3076400v1.doc
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on , 2025.
(Seal)
PRINCIPAL
By:
Name:
Title:
By:
Name:
Title:
SURETY
By:
Name:
Title:
By:
Name:
Title:
Attach Notarial Acknowledgement or Jurat for both the Surety and Principal Signatures
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney